The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutComments LCOG 6/25/2008 (2) ;,:- L1MBIRD Andrew From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: TAYLOR Paula L [PTAYLOR@lcog,org] Wednesday, June 25, 20082:36 PM L1MBIRD'Andrew DONOVAN James RE: GalceranlS 57th St DRAFT Staff Notes Thanks, Andy. The determination whether an extension is extraterritorial or not will be based on statutory authority, Public works may view the extension of a line differently than allowed by law. Maybe they can provide you a statutory citation so we can all be on the same page, pt From: Sent: To: Ce: Subject: ' UMBIRD Andrew rmailto:alimbird((j)d.c;nrinafiplrl.nr.usl Wednesday, June 2S, 2008 2:02 PM TAYLOR Paula L DONOVAN James RE: GaleeranlS S7th St DRAFT Staff Notes Hi Paula, I don't know the correlation between the City's current extraterritorial policy and ORS 199. My current understanding of the extraterritorial extension provision is the result of a discussion with Greg Mott right after the issue was presented to City Council back in May, I had been under the impression that no sewer or water lines could be extended through any unincorporated areas without an extraterritorial extension, Apparently, this is not the case - extension from one area of the City to another area (even if crossing unincorporated areas) would be handled as a construction project. I'll get clarification from Public Works regarding the portion of South 57th Street. If it's not a "go", we'll need to get an updated legal to exclude the portions of S, 57th St. contained within the current legal description, I agree, it would be efficient to annex segments of an abutting fully-improved street whenever the opportunity arises, Andy From: TAYLOR Paula L rmailto:PTAYLOR(ii)lcoo,oro] Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 1:35 PM To: LIMBIRD Andrew; BANKS Megan H; DONOVAN James Cc: JONES Brenda Subject: RE: Galceran/S 57th St DRAFT Staff Notes Andy, Do you know if the extraterritorial information is based on current law - not ORS 199? Also, just to be dear, This annexation, as submitted by the applicant, includes a small segment of S57th St r/w. If the city does nothing, the small segment will be annexed, Our question really comes from the city's own past practices- the r/w is annexed when it is fully improved. Public Works staff indicates it is fully improved - hence our question, The extraterritorial stuff just complicates it, I also recall that the city council was pretty united in i'ts decision to not allow extension of water or sewer lines, Check with Jim or Mo.tt to see if the CC made a distinction between line extension and service, There could also be new information (council action, legal advice) that we are not aware of. So that the council can see the portion of S57th St in the annexation area, an assessor's map will work 1 ,',' '""0' ;'/2t-/ZoO/ .."_ ;J. ~.:.~....\:i'iV,-, .~ /- Planner: AL i' better 'than a GIS map, Attached is a copy of the map I used to check the legal. Hopefully you will be able to tell how convoluted the description is (hence the note on our initial review form that the legal will not meet DOR requirements for one perimeter description), But back to the question at hand, hopefully you can see how the description ends up describing TL 200 and a portion of S 57th St. You can also see that other portions of S57th Street are already annexed, but most is not, It would make the delivery of all urban services more efficient and clearly under the city's authority if the r/w was annexed. Annexation of roadway does not necessarily result in jurisdictional transfer of roadway. Things to ponder..,.. pt <<File: A&T map Igl descp.pdf>> From: UMBIRD Andrew fmailto:alimbirc1filri.c;nrinafif"ld.or.usl Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:02 PM To: BANKS Megan H; DONOVAN James Cc: JONES Brenda; TAYLOR Paula L Subject: RE: Galceran/S 57th St DRAFT Staff Notes We can research the property line adjustment issue and see if there is an earlier PLA file for this property, I don't see anything in our records, however, ' Regarding S, 571h Street annexation, we will need to have buy-in from the Public Works Dept. for annexing a sliver or a whole segment of the street. It is my understanding that an extraterritorial extension does not constitute an extension of sewer/water/etc, from within the City limits, across unincorporated area, to reach another area inside the City orovided there is no service'extended to properties outside the City Limits, Thanks Andy From: BANKS Megan H rmailto:MBANKS@lcoa,orol Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:38 AM To: LIMBIRD Andrew; DONOVAN James Cc: JONES Brenda; TAYLOR Paula L Subject: Galceran/S 57th St DRAFT Staff Notes Hi Jim and Andy: attached is the draft Galceran/S 57th St r/w annexation staff notes for your review, A couple issues of note: 1, Attached is the property line adjustment'deed ,pdfthat shrinks TL 100 and increases TL 200, This is important because it means the current configuration of TL 200 is not a legal lot. Depending on how Springfield addresses these, I would imagine the property owner would need a land use action such as a property line adjustment prior to any sort of subdivision, Maybe this could be done concurrent with the subdivision? <<File: Property Line Adjustment Deed,pdf>> 2, A small portion of S 57th Street is included in the annexation area. The staff report indicates that the small portion of r/w should be withdrawn because of city past practice, We are recommending that Springfield consider annexing S 57th Street (from the existing city limits at Ridge Ct to at least the S lot line of TL 200), It is already improved as indicated in the Annexation Agreement, and we're not sure why its not included, If it doesn't get included now, when would it be annexed? And if the r/w is not annexed prior to the need to extend the sewer line extraterritorially, and the city doesn't have an extraterritorial extension process, how will sewer service be provided from S 57th St? This will be a similar conundrum for the Horton properties annexed in 2007 and 2008 on the west side of S 57th Street. Let us know how you want us to proceed, <<File: galceran SN 6-25-08.doc >> 2 Date Received:~/;k>?f Planner: AL .. I We are working on 57th St Prop LLC ana Franklin staff notes, as well as a Draft AIS lu" Galceran, and will send those shortly, Thanks, MB and PT, Annexation Princesses Megan H, Banks 541-<382-7413 mbanks@lcog,org , 3 Dat~r'(eceived: 6hr'lmJL. Planner: AL / c;' , :~~.i ..r L1MBIRD Andrew From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: L1MBIRD Andrew Wednesday, June 25, 20082:02 PM TAYLOR Paula L DONOVAN James RE: Galceran/S 57th St DRAFT Staff Notes Hi Paula, I don't know the correlation between the City's current extraterritorial policy and ORS 199, My current understanding of the extraterritorial extension provision is the result of a discussion with Greg Mott right after the issue was presented to City Council back in May, I had been under the impression that no sewer or water lines could be extended through any unincorporated areas without an extraterritorial extension, Apparently, ,this is not the case - extension from qne area of the City to another area (even if crossing unincorporated areas) would be handled as a construction project. I'll get clarification from Public Works regarding the portion of South 57th Street. If it's not a "go", we'll need to get an updated legal to exclude the portions of S, 571h St. contained within the current legal description, I agree, it would be efficient to annex segments of an abutting fully-improved street whenever the opportunity arises, Andy From: TAYLOR Paula L [mailto:PTAYLOR@lcog.org] Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 1:35 PM To: 11MBIRD Andrew; BANKS Megan H; DONOVAN James Cc: JONES Brenda Subject: RE: Galceran/S 57th St DRAFT Staff Notes Andy, " Do you know if the extraterritorial information is based on current law - not ORS 199? Also, just to be clear, This annexation, as submitted by the applicant, includes a small segment of S57th St r/w, If the city does nothing, the small segment will be annexed. Our question really comes from the city's own'past practices - the r/w iS'annexed when it is fully improved, Public Works staff indicates it is fully improved - hence our question. The extraterritorial stuff just complicates it, I also recall that the city council was pretty united in its decision to not allow extension of water or sewer lines, Check with Jim or Mott to see if the CC made a distinction between line extension and service, There could also be new information (council action, legal advice) that we are not aware of. So that the council can see the portion of, S57th St in the annexation area, an assessor's map will work better than a GIS map. Attached is a copy of the map I used to check the legal. Hopefully you will be able to tell how convoluted the description is (hence the note on our initial review form that the legal will not meet DOR requirements for one perimeter description). But back to the question at hand, hopefully you can see how the description ends up describing TL 200 and a portion of S 57th St, You can also see that other portions of S57th Street are already annexed, but most is not. It would make the delivery of all urban services more efficient and clearly under the city's authority if the r/w was annexed, Annexation of roadway does not necessarily result in jurisdictional transfer of roadway, Things to ponder..... pt 1 Data Received: hI2~/Joot Planner: AL ;\ \, --,,} " <<File: A&T map 19l descp,pdf>> From: UMBIRD Andrew rmailto:alimbird(fi)d.c;nrinafiplrl.nr.uc;;l Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:02 PM To: BANKS Megan H; DONOVAN James Cc: JONES Brenda; TAYLOR Paula L Subject: RE: Galceran/S 57th St DRAFT Staff Notes ) We can research the property line adjustment issue and see if there is an earlier PLA file for this property, I don't see anything in our records, however. Regarding S, 57th Street annexation, we will need to have buy-in from the Public Works Dept. for annexing a sliver or a whole segment of the street. It is my understanding that an extraterritorial extension does not constitute an extension of sewer/water/etc, from within the City limits, across unincorporated area; to reach another area inside the City orovided there is no service extended to properties outside the City Limits, Thanks Andy From: BANKS Megan H rmailto:MBANKS(Clilcoo,ora] Sent: Wednesday, June 2S, 2008 11:38 AM To: UMBIRD Andrew; DONOVAN James Cc: JONES' Brenda; TAYLOR Paula L Subject: GalceranjS 57th St DRAFT Staff Notes Hi Jim and Andy: attached is the draft Galceran/S 57th St r/w annexation staff notes for your review, A couple issues of note: 1, Attached is the property line adjustment deed ,pdf that shrinks TL 100 and increases TL 200, This is important because it means the current configuration of TL 200 is not a legal lot. Depending on how Springfield addresses these, I would imagine the property owner would need a land use action such as a property line adjustment prior to any sort of subdivision, Maybe this could be done'concurrent with the subdivision? << File: Property Line Adjustment Deed,pdf>> 2, A small portion of S 57th Street is included in the annexation area, The staff report indicates that the small portion of r/w should be withdrawn because of city past practice, We are recommending that Springfield consider annexing S 57th Street (from the existing city limits at Ridge Ct to at least the S lot line of TL 200), It is already improved as indicated in the Annexation Agreement, and we're not sure why its not included, If it doesn't get included now, when would it be annexed? And if the r/w is not annexed prior to the need to extend the sewer line extraterritorially, and the city doesn't have an extraterritorial extension process, how will sewer service be provided from S 57th St? This will be a similar conundrum for the Horton properties annexed in 2007 and 2008 on the west side of S 57th Street. Let us know how you want us to proceed. <<File: galceran SN 6-25-08,doc>> We are working on 57th St Prop LLC and Franklin staff notes, as well as a Draft AIS for Galceran, and will send those shortly, Thanks, MB and PT, Annexation Princesses Megan H, Banks 541-682-7413 mbanks@lcog,org / 2 Dat~ Received' 6/:U/2rX1! Planner: AL I I \ .,- \ L1MBIRD Andrew From: Sent: -':0: Cc: Subject: TAYLOR Paula L [PTAYLOR@lcog,org] Wednesday, June 25, 2008 1 :35 PM L1MBIRD Andrew; BANKS Megan H; DONOVAN James JONES Brenda RE: Galceran/S 57th St DRAFT Staff Notes Attachments: A&T map.lgl descp,pdf Andy, Do'you know if the extraterritorial information is based on current ,law - not ORS 199? Also, just to be clear. This annexation, as submitted by theapplicant,,includes a small segment ofS57th St r/w, If the city does nothing, the small segment will be annexed, Our question really comes from the city's own past practices - the r/w is annexed when it is fully improved, Public Works staff indicates it is fully improved'~ hence our question. The extraterritorial stuff just complicates it. I also recall that the city council was pretty united in its decision to not allow extension of water or sewer lines. Check with Jim or Mott to see if the CC made a distinction between line extension and service. There could also be new information (council action, legal advice) that weare not aware of. So that the council can see the'portion of S57th St in the annexation area:an assessor's map will work better than a GIS map. Attached is a copy of the map I used to check the legal. Hopefully you will be able to tell how convoluted the description is (hence the note on our initial review'form that the legal will not meet DOR requirements for one perimeter description). But back to the question at hand, hopefully you can see how the description ends up describing TL,200 and a portion of S 57th St, You can also see that other portions of S57th Street are already annexed, but most is not, It would make the delivery of all urban services more efficient and clearly under the city's authority if the r/w was annexed, Annexation of roadway does not necessarily result in jurisdictional transfer of roadway. Things to ponder..... pt rm A& T map Igl escp,pdf (B2 KE From: Sent: To: Ce: SUbject: UMBIRD Andrew rmailto:alimbirdfilci.snrinafielrl.or.usl Wednesday, June 25, 200B 12:02 PM BANKS Megan H; DONOVAN James JONES Brenda; TAYLOR Paula L RE: Galceran/S 57th Sl ORAFT Staff Noles We can research the property line adjustment issue and see if there is an earlier PLA file for this property, r don't see anything in our records, however. Regarding S, 57th Street annexation, we will need to have buy-in from the Public Works Dept. for annexing a sliver or a whole segment of the street. \ It is my understanding that an extraterritorial extension does not constitute an extension of seweriwater/etc, from within . 1 Date Received:_f~.rI2,voL Planner: AL' I . r:.. (. the City limits, across unincorporated ," ea, to reach another area inside the City or'mded there is no service extended to properties outside the City Limits, Thanks Andy From: BANKS Megan H rmailto:MBANKS(lillcoa.oral Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:38 AM To: LlMBIRD Andrew; DONOVAN James Cc: JONES Brenda; TAYLOR Paula L Subject: Galceran/S 57th St DRAFT Staff Notes Hi Jim and Andy: attached is the draft Galceran/S 57th St r/w annexation staff notes for your review, A couple issues of note: 1, Attached is the property line adjustment deed ,pdf that shrinks TL 100 and increases TL 200, This is important because it means the current configuration of TL 200 is not a legal lot. Depending on how Springfield addresses these, I would imagine the property owner would need a land use action such as a property line adjustment prior to any sort of subdivision, Maybe this could be done concurrent with the subdivision? " <<File: Property Line Adjustment Deed,pdf>> 2, A small portion of S 57th Street is included in the annexation area, The staff report indicates that the small portion of r/w , should be withdrawn because of city past practice, We are recommending that Springfield consider annexing S 57th Street (from the existing city limits at Ridge Ct to at least the S lot line of TL 200), It is already improved as indicated in the Annexation Agreement, and we're not sure why its not included, If it doesn't get included now, when would it be annexed? And if the r/w is not annexed prior to the need to extend the sewer line extraterritorially, and the city, doesn't have an extraterritorial extension process, how will sewer service be provided from S 57th St? This will be a similar conundrum for the Horton properties annexed in 2007 and 2008 on the west side ofS 57th Street. Let us know how you want us to proceed, << File: galceran SN 6-25-08.doc>> We are working on 57th St Prop LLC and Franklin staff notes, as well as a Draft AIS for Galceran, and will send those shortly, Thanks, MB and PT, Annexation Princesses , Megan H. Banks 541-682-7413 mbanks@lcog,org 2 Date Received: Planner: AL 6./7C/:kJO! / 5 EC r 4 T. 1 85. 1/4 . , LANE COUoo~TY SCALE 1. - 1 i~ I '~,. - ,.~ '. ':iif-"Wf~ i ,", . : II ,'/. I ::r:1 I I i:liL. i , ~ I ; - ~: ' I ! : ~ I f+ I : ~ I I ~. , .......,.... ~.l I "II I ", tf, I '~ I III ~ : ,..,. ~ I '", "''' , t:,.J .. .,..... '-'* ,..;,," ~""''i ' '.;.J; , ,'~~ t',~. t ~ . ;W~; , ''', e€t~' -~.=-" 1;; "l;~~, "",~ki~"~hi'o.\;'1i !~'I ~ "'" ~o '>--~;:' 10'" ( r . ",... ~'I'-'"l.''' , . .~, i, " I:: 8 ~ .315 .~ rT'8 9 8 z e, 90"'~' ~ 2900 ~, · ',Q" . -' - -', . ,,,~"t,. .:,...~. '. ;I: ;. ~ .",' - RIDGE CR~. DR. Ri fl" ~ ..., ;.n, e w@ ~ 5 ~ - '. "'0.'30' < "'.<0 Ri " s .9"58'30* [; 0-<' , , _'...,.. ~ 90,00' 8 '3' CIl I',C~ ,.... 'I-"~."""" ~ eT I 1307:z .~...t032 , ' '\8 ~ r"j'1J15' Wt. J I '!;1.'."ii '"'3000' @ 1320 il ~ 0.18 ACr-:;.. "'mrT. . 0.. ~ 4'~IlO,15 AC. ::; ~0.17 AC,: .: ""'~'~~j~7 . .......'30." ~ 11 ~ ',m. n. - .... '_ J ~',., ' 11 " _;. I 1308 w, ....00'00' ~ 3100 " ~ . < ea.oo "q b . . '.... ,0, rT. a~, 0.17 AC. - , ~. ~. 015 . ~ CIl m ~ a, ~ ~ ,~: ~{f' b 1316 -~ .,,, n,: .~ z'l~ 'z ,~1 "~O~lAC,w. W ,.;,.< '~ ll, !: ,~ ,0',. so. n. ~ . ....'.30. < Ii! "'" ;p~ · T" :15 · ..,,,. ,.c., 1309. ;: 2 I " 8 1312 ~II\'\. ' , z '_ _. _ ... [I (,C1C1~GI')ft... .......$~.3O'E '.. L :1/4 NE If> 18 02 04 11 ~sr 477.6.J' ;(ST4'W EST <477.63' , . ...' "I ...;' .;~ ....:..\".... 19':iO(Q Sf 477.63' 43' C 477.6:;' "\' 13.: (_47$.1"_ -.. \:I' ..J~II""'"- ':l'.l7=-' <:I.lIOlll'( II _.J..75.~ '6.643H ~. -j200V . . " 'PI Date Received. , Planner: AI. R.2W. W.M. I 1':1' I: ,I I I I, 20,1 I 'P'I '-I'-r , I : : J ~I I , '. f ,/ , j " ,~' s: er'!lB'JO' (: / . " I ~ 1 ~'k7 I~ ~'~ ~s.oo' ~;: ~,a \ \ ----~---------------- 200 ,": 1,81 AC,.., , tP ~\ ~\. Cl..R~I:l.t.aJBM lot '''8'54' \{ N ~ 358'4<:1':50'''E"ST c24.7(l' ~ '.Jft~llllll , . .,231l>i L,,,,,,^ i. (-3(f.6Z0H' ~ ~lIVl" 300 ; - OJ'" 37 ~~;~~~_~ 9~ ........................................... - - € '.'-:'if .224.10' EAST 44'.1.40' 400 1.39 AC. " . ~ . 111 ~ ,- L1MBIRD Andrew From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: BANKS Megan H [MBANKS@lcog,org] Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11 :38 AM L1MBIRD Andrew; DONOVAN James JONES Brenda; TAYLOR Paula L Galceran/S 57th St DRAFT Staff Notes Attachments: Property Line Adjustment Deed,pdf; galceran SN 6-25-08,doc Hi Jim and Andy: attached is the draft Galceran/S 57th St r/w annexation staff notes for your review, A coupie issues of note: 1, Attached is the property line adjustment deed ,pdf that shrinks TL 100 and increases TL 200, This is important because it means the current configuration of TL 200 is not a legal lot. Depending on how Springfield addresses these, I would imagine the property owner would need a land use action such as a property line adjustment prior to any sort of subdivision, Maybe this could be done concurrent with the subdivision? '~ Property Une Ijustment Deed. 2, A small portion of S 57th Street is included in the annexation area, The staff report indicates that the small portion of rlw should be withdrawn because of city past practice, We are recommending that Springfield consider annexing S 57th Street (from the existing city limits at Ridge Ct to at least the S lot line of TL 200), It is already improved as indicated in the Annexation Agreement, and we're not sure why its not included, If it doesn't get included now, when would it be annexed? And if the rlw is not annexed prior to the need to extend the sewer line extraterritorially, and the city doesn't have an extraterritorial extension process, how will sewer service be provided from S 57th StY This will be a similar conundrum for the Horton properties annexed in 2007 and 2008 on the west side of S 57th Street. Let us know how you want us to proceed, 1Wii.1\..~ ~ galceran SN 'S-D8.doc (95 KI We are working on 57th St Prop LLC and Franklin staff notes, as well as a Draft AIS for Galceran, and will send those shortly, Thanks, MB and PT, Annexation Princesses Megan H. Banks 541-682-7413 mbanks@lcog,org 1 DatE;) Received: rr/l.,-hoo,f Planner: AL 1'7