Loading...
Ordinance 2011COUNCIL BILL N0. 1125 ORDINANCE N0. 2011 AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING AND RECLASSIFYING CERTAIN PROPERTIES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 99E, NORTH OF TAYLOR HONDA, FROM MARION COUNTY COMMERCIAL RETAIL TO WOODBURN CG (COMMERCIAL GENERAL) CLASSIFICATION. WHEREAS, the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan Map has established certain use zones within the Gity of Woodburn's Urban Growth Boundary; and WHEREAS, annexation and zone change proceedings have been held before the Woodburn Planning Commission and City Council in accordance with ORS 222.120, 222.170 and 222.180 and Chapters 7 and 15 of the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance, and WHEREAS, notice was duly given and the consent of the requisite numb?r of land owners obtained so that annexation could be completed without the calling of an election; and WHEREAS, the City Council deems the classification CG (Commercial General) to be in the public interest, in satisfaction of a general public need, and is in accord with the Comprehensive Plan, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF WOODBURN ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The following described property within the City of Woodburn's Urban Growth Boundary, Plarion County, State of Oregon, is hereby annexed into the City of Woodburn and reclassified from Marion County Commercial Retail use to City of Woodburn CG (Commercial General): PARCEL A (TL# 92890-010) Beginning at the Northeast corner of Lot 2, Woodburn Fruit Farms, P1arion County, Oregon; thence West, 12.0 feet; thence South 30° 19' West, 100.0 feet; thence West, 250.0 feet to the East line of the Pacific Highway 99E; thence South 30° 19' West, 97 feet more or less along said East line to a point vdhich is North 30° 19' East, 285.0 feet from the Northwest corner of the tract of land conveyed to John R. and Josele Taylor, Page 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1125 ORDINANCE N0. 2011 by deed recorded in Volume 660, Page 164, Deed Records for said County; thence along a line which bears South 59° 41' East to its point of intersection with a line which bears South from the point of beginning, said line being the East line of said Lot 2; thence North along said East line to the point of beginning. PARCEL B (TL# 92890-061) Beginning at a point which is West 142.0 feet, South 30° 19' West, 100.0 feet West, 250 feet and South 30° 19' West 382.0 feet from the Northeast corner of Lot 2, Woodburn Fruit Farms, Plarion County, Oregon, said point being the Northwest corner of the tract of land conveyed to John R. Taylor and Josele Taylor by deed recorded in Volume 660, Page 164, Deed Records for said County; thence South 59° 41' East, 735.57 feet to a point on the East line of said Lot 2; thence North along said East line to its point of intersection with a line which bears South 59° 41' East from a point which is North 30° 19' East, 285 feet from the point of beginning; thence North 59° 41' East along a line to its point of intersection with the East line of Pacific Highway 99E; thence South 30° 19' West along said line to the point of beginning. Section 2. This action is taken based upon the staff reports and findings which are attached hereto and, by this reference, incorporated herein. Section 3. The City Administrator is hereby directed to correct the Woodburn 7_oning ~9ap and City Limit Boundary to the classification and boundary change herein made. ~~ ~~_ ~% Approved as to form:- Gity Attorney Date r~. ,.. APPROVED.' ; ~, ;.,f.~,•,~ .,~ %-,.._._ . , NA CY A. ~°KIRKSEY, MAYOR j Passed by the Council __ January 23, 1989 Submitted to the ~1ayor January 23, 1989 Approved by the Mayor _ January 23, 1.989 Filed in the ,Office of the Recorder _ January_23, 1989 ,_ ATTEST: %`%-r'' ~ ~~.=~~ c~ ~~i r,r t t z..-~ ~BAI~NEY 0. ¢tfRRIS~`~ ECORDER City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 2 - COUNCIL BILL N0. 1125 ORDINANCE N0. 2011 jj •~ 4~,, ~., STAFF REPORT ANNEXATION CASE X88-03? 1. INTRODOCTION- ,;~` The applicants Dempsy and Mary Sullivan are requesting annexation of approximately 8 acres that adjoin the Woodburn city limits on the East side of State Highway 99E just North of Taylor Honda (See Map I). 2. GENERAL INFORMATION: (A) STATE STATUTES: For the City to initiate such a request requires that specific State statutes be observed in the hearings process. In regards to State Iaw~and Annexations, the "triple Majority" rule prevails. That is, a majority of the land owners own mare than half of the land (8 acres) and represent more than half of the assessed value of all real property. Because there is only one owner and he is requesting Annexation (Attachment I) the annexa- tion is not required to be subject to a vote of the registered. voters of the City but is required to be reviewed and approved through the hearings process by the_ City. This statute reads as follows: 222.170.: Effect `of consent to annexation. by"''territory;`- proclamation. with and .without city election; ordinance of .annexa.tion;records transmitted to Secretary of State... (1) .the legislative body of the City need-not .call`ar hold~an election in any, contiguous territory proposed ~tca be annexed, or-poste notice in ,the con= tiguous territory, i~f mor.e than half..of.the owners of land 3n the territory, who also awn mare than half of the land in the contiguous territory and of real property therein representing more than half of the assessed value of -all real property in the contiguous territory consent in writing to the annexation of their land in the territory and file a statement of their consent with the legislative body on or before the day; (See Attachment 5). (a) The public hearing is held under ORS 222.120, if the City legislative body dispenses with submitting the question in the registered voters of the City. - 1 - l _. ~_. (B) LAND USE INVENTORY: Presently the City has 344 acres of land designated for Commercial use within the city l:~.mits {See Table I). Of that 211 acres are in use. This leaves approximate- ly 133 acres in land parcels ranging in size from 60' x 100' lots to 15 acres available for development. The proposed annexation would represent an additional S acres being added to that inventory. TABLE I COMMERCIAL LANDS INVENTORY LAND IN VACANT+ VACANT+ TOTAL USE AVAILABLE AVAILABLB Inside City Limits 211 133 0 344 Within Urban 12 + - - 460 Growth Bndry. 3. COMPRBHENSIVE PLAN STATEMENTS: (A) POLICIES FOR COMMERCIAL LAND DEVELOPMENT: (1) The City should at all times have sufficient-land t_o.accommodate the retail needs o.f, the City and the ,.surrounding market area. The. City presently. has four major commercial areas: 99E, I-5 . In.tercharige;°the, Downtown area and.the,224/.211/99E ~: four` .corrier~ intersection area.' N~o new areas should be: established. {Vol. `I~, Pg.. 24).. (B ) POLICIES FOR AItiR~TEXATION: {1) Annexation policies are extremely. important-for. the City:. While it is important that enough land is available for the necessary development anticipated in the City of Woodburn, it is also essential to prevent too much hand being included in the city limits as this leads to inefficient, sprawling development. Because of the need to plan for public improvements, the City should insure that there is a five year supply of vacant land within the City. Services should be provided to that land during that five year period. (Vol. I, Pg. 26). - 2 - C ~,_ (C) DBVSLOPMBNT ZONES: The City should encourage development in areas of existing facilities first. Secottdly, the City should encourage development in areas where extensions of existing City services can be accommodated. The City should encourage development of new areas to which services can abe most cheaply extended to. The City should develop any other areas only as a last resort. The City will adhere to the policies in the Storm Water and Water and Sewer elements of the Comprehen- sive Plan. (Vol. I, Pg. 24). (D) POLICIES ON GROWTH: (1} To insure the growth is orderly and efficient, the City shall phase the needed public services in accordance with the expected rate of growth. The extensions of the existing public services should be in accordance with the master plans in this Comprehensive Plan. (Vol. I, Pg. 30). (2) The County shall retain responsibility for regulating land use on lands within the urban growth area until such lands are annexed by the City. The urban growth area has been identified by the City as urbanizable and is considered to be available, over time, for urban development. (3j The City and County shall strive to. enhance the livability of~. the urban :growth. .area and -to :: promote 1.ogicaT ~ and orderly. ~developraerit ~fiherein in a cost effective manner.-.The County shall not allow urban ..density uses within. the urban growth boundary prior to annexation to the City unless agreed to in writing by-the City. `City sewer :and water facilities shall not be extended. beyond the city 1imi;ts, except as may-:be.agreed to in. writing by the City and County. {VoI. I, Pg. 30). (4) Conversion of land-within the boundary to urban uses shall be based on a consideration of: (a) Orderly, economic provision for public facilities and services; (b) Availability of sufficient land for the various uses to insure choices in the market place; (c} LCDC Goals; (d) Encouragement of in-filling development within developed areas before conversion of urbanizable areas; and C (e} Applicable provisions of the Marion County and City Comprehensive Plans. (Vol. I, Pg. 30 } . ~~ 4. FINDINGS• ~:. (1} The applicant is the sole applicant and owner of the property. Being the only property owner requesting annexation the City is not obligated to seek approval from the registered voters of the City of Woodburn. (2) The proposed annexation lies within the urban growth boundary as identified in the City's adopted Comprehen- sive Plan Map. Therefore, a request for annexation is feasible. (3) Adequate land presently exists to accommodate commer- cial development within the existing city limits. {4} The annexation would reflect a land use designation identified on the Comprehensive Plan Map. (5} The proposed site is contiguous to the existing city limits. (6} The City has the capability to handle the water, sewer and storm drain demands of the proposed uses as long as specific conditions are. met by a potential developer. 5. RI3CQbII+~NDATION:.. -Staff r;ecommends..approval of Annexation Case #88-03. - 4 - C_. - ~_:. '1 270 Montgomery Street • Woodburn, Oregon 97071 • 982-5222 November 29, 1988 ~F.R'I'TFTF.i) Dempsy D. & Mary M. Sullivan 1942 Rockland Drive, NW Salem, OR. 97304 Dear A4r. & Mrs. Sullivan: At this time the City of Woodburn is proceeding with the process of potentially annexing your property. This action would result in the conversion of your land at some time in the future from its existing land use designation of CR (Commercial Retail) by Marion County to a City designation of CG (Commercial General). Enclosed is a map that identifies those properties the City Council will consider for incorporation into the City. However, prior to the City carrying out this action your response as a property owner is required. This will assist the City in making a determination as to whether or not to annex your property. Please answer the following question, sign and return .in the enclosed self addressed envelope. The City would appreciate your response to this question by December 7, 1988. Do you wish to be annexed to the City? [~(] Yes [ ] No In closing, the Planning .Commission will review the Annexation Proposal and take testimony at some future date of which you will be notified. ~~ Signatu e o Property Owner(s) Dumps D . Su l iva ~~11 ~igi~a re ol~"groperty OwnerTs ) Mary Sullivan Date Signed: ~. ~ ~~ <`M1. ~~ .~`. VICINITY MAP ____ ~_ ~~:\~ . ~~. k~. ~ ~- ,~ . :a,~ _ ::` v`. S: .., ~~~~: Subject Property »»> ~~~:~~."~' ~.~~~~~:: ~. NORTH 6Y J+ 31 • 2 - J a i' l ~~ ~- P1.1)LL.I BLV'-r .[~~-t~;l .:t`[ F STORA( .! J~.u. f~(A~~ti~Ilf Ill F-HC i(IQCO l~OmES („Jllyt~~/rl'f=.f Lf;R FLf1N---•-- _F~la...f'K~T~~rIC~N__. ~.._..__..---- PARKING.-/.:?-R~ FFiG _F IOt.~.?. ~~~ _~~L~N.-_~E-E FiG7u1?ES _ ~1=NCE - x xx _ _--------- ~Ft dil- /~ n ~q`SU ~~ivaN L I I Hv~ _ \ z .... .. ~_- 7 _ \ \ ~~ \ ~ k ®e ScJ {I:ac ~ ~.~iam ~I ~ ~ i L ~ mrn ~r~r.~ 6 n... rw. w.. nirlg •C,;~ tSiA~~D., -e~~Y` `'~ pw,~E :. ~ q,A..•~ PNha~ •~. Q c ~ 9rk` ~_ - ox Bc _- ye.EO ~ GII56 1 .~~ 1!( ~ ,' ® - T I ~ _ 3aou ~, ,~. ~. ~„ --- 1 --: i 1 E".•'1. FA kCL p1~A~6 `.~~.i/I II ,". 1 • i I . /I/CI_I ~ .y.\ ® ~J~ ' $ ~ ~ ~ .. ~ 1 ('want lI l,xv u• ..~ a.. ~~ J ® ' 1 m ~ ~ a _--F ~ 1 _ ~ P1) NS E LTI ~ 1 fl' :,'S i ~.- ,. - - r --__ . _ -._....-_ _ 1 y~ < • ~ i----~ ~_. Applicant's Site Plan ;: \. STAFF REPORT ZONE CHANOE CASE #r88-03' 1. INTRODUCTION- ~~ Marion County has designated the applicants property as CR (Commercial Retail). This zone district is in place until such time as the City wishes to annex this acreage. At the time of annexation the property must fall into compliance with the City's land use designation of CG (Commercial General). It is the applicants desire to secure that land use designation which would allow him to expand his commer- cial development. (See Map I). (A) APPLICANTS REQUEST: "Far the past 20 years this 8 acre parcel has been occupied by Kilroy's Mobile Hame Sales. The back 5 acres have not been utilized. Plans are now to split the property in two parcels with Kilroy`s Mobile Home Sales using the North approximate 3 acres (Parcel 1) and a new business, Kilroy's self storage using the South 5 acres. Development is planned in three phases. The first phase will include the new construction of 5 storage buildings ..:with a.total .of.29,.750 Sq.Ft.-and.a new..- affice complex of 3,200.Sq.Ft: The office building will contain space for,bot:h ;businesses as well ,as quarters' fo.r ' the stoxage .m~nagex. :;A11 ,approp.rate dxainag.e, ~ water i.ines, fire.. protection,` driveways;. . lighting,. signs, sewer, utilities, irrigating system far landscaped area, fence,.:asphalt paved streets and appropriate.paving,for mobile home. display area. Phase II will consist of 18,800 Sq.Ft. of new storage buildings with asphalt streets. Phase IIL will consist of 18,060 Sq.Ft. of new storage buildings with asphalt.streets." 2. BURDEN OF PROOF: (ZONING ORDINANCE) (A) SECTION 16.080. BURDEN OF PROOF. The following specific questions shall be given consideration in evaluating requests regarding plan and zoning amend- ments and are as follows: ("a" is excluded). (b) To support a zone change, the applicant shall: (1) Show there is a need for the use proposed; and - 1 - `~~_. (2) Show that the particular piece of property in question will best meet that need. s (c) A City Council decision on Zbne and Comprehensive Map amendments are "judic,ial like", in that a decision must consider the Evidence and weigh that evidence against what the' Comprehensive Plan directs the Council to do .' (1) The property in question is presently being utilized for a mobile home dealership with the remainder of the parcel, approximately 5 acres is vacant. (2) Marion County has designated this parcel for Commercial use. Tn its Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map. The City of Woodburn also designates this parcel for this use. {3) The Woodburn Comprehensive Plan describes the parcel area as part of a commercial core. (4) To expand and improve the site requires City infrastructure services be provided. (5) The proposed uses is to expand the mobile home sales and mini storage facility. 3. FINDINGS.:.. (1) The Marion County Comprehensive~Plan Map has. designated the. concerned.:parc:e~1..: for Commercial- use.. . (2) The City of Woodburn's Comprehensive Map designates the. concerned property. for Commercial use. (3) The,-zone amendment from, County to City Commercial use is in.keeping.with both plans. (4) The proposed uses of a manufactured home sales lot and mini storage facility are permitted uses in a Commer- cial zone. 4. RECOMMENDATION- It is recommended that the request for zone change to CG (Commercial General) be approved based on established findings. 5. CONDITION OF APPROVAL: (i) A Site Plan and approval is required for any proposed development. - 2 -