Annexation-Boundary Proposal AN-0113 coy y fo c)D
TO: King City City Council
FROM: Ken Martin - Local Government Boundary Consultant
DATE: July 29, 2013
RE. Boundary Change Proposal No. AN-0113, Annexation to King City Scheduled
for Hearing Date of August 21, 2013
1. Recommendation/Action Requested: Approval
2. Background/Analysis: See Attached Staff Report
3. Financial Impact: None
4. Legal Issues: None
5. Controversial Issues: None
6. Link to Current City Policies: The relationship to the City Comprehensive Plan
is covered in the attached staff report.
7. Citizen Participation: Notice of this hearing invites testimony from any
interested party. Notice consisted of: 1) Posting 4
notices in the City 20 days prior to the hearing; 2)
Publishing notice twice in the Tigard Times; 3)
Mailed notice sent to affected local governments,
and all property owners within 500 feet of the area
to be annexed.
8. Other Government Participation: None, except as noted above, possible
participation in the hearing.
August 21, 2013 Hearing
PROPOSAL NO. AN-0113 - CITY OF KING CITY -Annexation
Petitioners: Property Owners/Voters: Ross & Tonya Adams, LWG LLC, James & Gulnara
Browder
Proposal No. AN-0113 was initiated by a consent petition of the property owners and registered
voters. The petition meets the requirement for initiation set forth in ORS 222.170 (2) (double
majority annexation law) and Metro Code 3.09.040 (a) (Metro's minimum requirements for a
petition).
The Council must review the proposal and determine whether it is in compliance with all
applicable criteria. If the City Council approves the proposal it must adopt an ordinance with
findings and reasons to support the approval.
The territory to be annexed is located generally on the west side of the City on the east edge of
SW 131 st Ave. and the west edge of SW 128th Ave north of SW Jordan Way and south of SW
Dickson St. The territory contains 5.4 acres, 3 single family dwellings, a population of 9 and
has an assessed value of$657,150.
REASON FOR ANNEXATION.
The applicants desire City services to facilitate redevelopment of the property. An attached
residential development is planned for the site.
CRITERIA FOR DECISION-MAKING
The only criterion for deciding city boundary changes within the statutes is the territory must be
contiguous to the City. However, the 1997 Legislature directed Metro to establish criteria that
must be used by all cities within the Metro boundary and Metro has done so through adoption of
Section 3.09 of the Metro Code.
To approve a boundary change, the City must:
(1) Find that the change is consistent with expressly applicable provisions in:
(A) Any applicable urban service agreement adopted pursuant to ORS
195.205;
(B) Any applicable annexation plan adopted pursuant to ORS 195.205;
(C) Any applicable cooperative planning agreement adopted pursuant to ORS
195.020 (2) between the affected entity and a necessary party;
(D) Any applicable public facility plan adopted pursuant to a statewide
planning goal on public facilities and services; and
Proposal AN-0113 - Page 1
(E) Any applicable comprehensive plan;
(F) Any applicable concept plan; and
(2) Consider whether the boundary change would:
(A) Promote the timely, orderly and economic provision of public facilities and
services;
(B) Affect the quality and quantity of urban services; and
(C) Eliminate or avoid unnecessary duplication of facilities and services.
There are no cooperative agreements, urban service agreements or annexation plans
specifically adopted pursuant to ORS 195 in effect in this area. The proposal is consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan as stated in the section below.
LAND USE PLANNING
REGIONAL PLANNING
General Information
This territory is inside Metro's jurisdictional boundary and inside the regional Urban Growth
Boundary (UGB).
Regional Framework Plan
The law which dictates that Metro adopt criteria for boundary changes specifically states that
those criteria shall " . . . Ensure that a boundary change is in compliance with the Metro regional
framework plan, as defined in ORS 197.015, and cooperative agreements and urban service
agreements adopted pursuant to ORS Chapter 195." Metro's Regional Framework Plan
includes two adopted functional plans - the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan and the
Regional Transportation Plan.
The Regional Framework Plan, which includes the regional urban growth goals and objectives,
the Growth Management Functional Plan and the Regional Transportation Plan were examined
and found not to contain specific criteria applicable to boundary changes.
WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING
As noted above the Metro Code states that the Council's decision on this boundary change
should be ". . . consistent with expressly applicable provisions" in any applicable comprehensive
plan. Thus the applicable plans must be examined for "specific directly applicable standards or
criteria."
The Washington County Comprehensive Plan is the applicable plan for this area.
Proposal AN-0113 - Page 2
County Planning. The Washington County Bull Mountain Community Plan designates the area
to be annexed as R-15, Residential. This designation allows for densities of 12-15 units per
acre with 2100 square foot minimum lot sizes for detatched dwellings and 1600 square feet for
attached units.
Urban Planninq Area Agreement
Under the Washington County/King City Urban Planning Area Agreement (UPAA), the City is
responsible for preparing the public facilities plan required by OAR 660-11 within the urban
planning area. The City agrees to notify the County of any actions requiring a hearings process
which is quasi-judicial in nature. The notice is required to be made at least 10 days prior to the
hearing. The notice was provided more than ten days prior to the Planning Commission hearing
and the City Council hearing.
D. The CITY and the COUNTY agree that when annexation to the CITY takes place, the
transition in land use designation from one jurisdiction to another should be orderly,
logical and based on a mutually agreed upon plan.
1. For land which has COUNTY urban plan designations other than Future
Development 10 Acre (FD-10), upon annexation, the CITY agrees to convert
COUNTY plan designations to CITY plan and zone designations which most
closely approximate the density, use provisions and standards of the
COUNTY designations.
CITY PLANNING
The Land Use Planning element of the City's Comprehensive Plan says that:
. . . The City will work toward establishing a mutually approved growth management
agreement with Washington County to ensure that:
b. Urban development inside King City's Urban Planning Area may be
allowed to annex to the City of King City in accordance with the City
Charter.
The Urbanization element of the plan contains the following:
Planning Responsibility and Annexation
New development standards and long range policy are now controlled by Washington
County for land outside the city limits. If land is annexed, the responsibility shifts to the
City. The City has an agreement with the County that a "similar zoning" designation will
be applied to land that might be annexed to King City. As a result, annexation does not
affect the basic uses allowed on properties outside the City in the short term. The City
does, however, have the ability to amend land use policies and designations for annexed
land as needs of the City change.
Proposal AN-0113 - Page 3
The City of King City is an active municipality concerned with maintaining the quality of life
of its residents. The City recognizes that change and growth will occur regardless of any
action taken by the City government. By taking an active role in the planning of areas
which are undeveloped and within the City's UPA, the City can guide the type and quality
of developments that are compatible with the original community.
A zone change from County R-15 to City R-12 is being processed in conjunction with this
annexation. A separate report will cover that issue in detail.
FACILITIES AND SERVICES
ORS 195 Agreements. ORS 195 requires agreements between providers of urban services.
Urban services are defined as: sanitary sewers, water, fire protection, parks, open space,
recreation and streets, roads and mass transit. These agreements are to specify which
governmental entity will provide which service to which area in the long term. The statute also
authorizes creation of annexation plans and annexation plan annexations subsequent to
adoption of urban services agreements. The counties are responsible for facilitating the creation
of the urban service agreements. The statute was enacted in 1993 but no ORS 195 urban
service agreements or annexation plans involving King City have yet been adopted.
Water. Water service is provided to the City of King City via an intergovernmental agreement
with the City of Tigard. There is a 12 inch water line in SW 131St adjacent to the west edge of
the property to be annexed and there is an 8 inch water line in SW Dickson Street on the north
edge of the property. The City may withdraw the territory from the District upon annexation.
ORS 222.520, 222.120(5) and 222.465.
Sewer. The City contracts with the Washington County's Clean Water Services District to
provide collector sewers in the City. Clean Water Services provides treatment and major
transmission lines to all of urbanized Washington County and provides collector service to some
urbanized unincorporated areas. Clean Water Services has sanitary sewer lines adjacent to the
territory to be annexed in SW 128t" Avenue and SW 131St Avenue.
Storm Drainage. Clean Water Services has responsibility for surface water management within
the Washington County urban growth boundary. Clean Water Services has entered into an
intergovernmental agreement with King City for allocation of the City and the Clean Water
Services responsibilities. The City owns the facilities but the District does the maintenance.
Parks and Recreation. Many recreational facilities in the City are owned, managed and operated
by the homeowners associations. The City has a 17 acre park on the southwest corner of the
City.
Transportation. The territory is within the boundary of the Washington County Urban Road
Maintenance District. The City may withdraw the territory from the District upon annexation.
ORS 222.520 and 222.120(5). If the City declares the territory withdrawn from the district on the
effective date of the annexation the District's tax levy value will no longer apply.
Police. The territory is within the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District. The City
may withdraw the territory from the District upon annexation. ORS 222.520 and 222.120(5). If
the City declares the territory withdrawn from the District on the effective date of the annexation
the District's tax levy value will no longer apply.
Upon annexation police services will be provided by the City Police department.
Proposal AN-0113 - Page 4
Vector Control. The territory is within the County Service District for Vector Control. The City
may withdraw the territory from the District upon annexation. ORS 222.520 and 222.120(5).
Street Lights. The area to be annexed is within Washington County Service District No. 1 for
street lights. The City may withdraw the territory from District upon annexation. ORS 222.520
and 222.120(5).
Other Services. Planning and other services will be available from the City upon annexation.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the study and the Proposed Findings and Reasons for Decision attached in Exhibit A,
the staff recommends Proposal No. AN-0113 be approved and that the City withdraw the
annexed area from the Tigard Water District, the Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol District, the Urban
Road Maintenance District, the Washington County Vector Control District and the Washington
County Service District No. 1 for Street Lights.
Proposal AN-0113 - Page 5
2S1W16 City of King City
Washington
::
■r
+� ■r
a
a aEft
—
MEAs
r 1
:•� �: .1 :+�� �; ;; _; � 111 1 1
r
��.l�►l►��''i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�ii�i�i�i�i�i&i�i�i�1
.�•.x..1.,.....................4
••••••••!•!.!•!i!�!�!i!i!��Di-----
' Clark
®
Data Resource Center
1
.0► NE Grand Ave City of King City Ken Martin Consulting K M C
Portland.OR 97232-2736 E= Area to be annexed AN-01 13 P.O.Box 290;99
http:/ANww.oregonmetro.gov/drc Portland,OR 97296_90
�AMetro ► 222-0955 13,750
Exhibit A
AN-0113
FINDINGS
Based on the staff report and public hearing, the Council found that:
1. The territory to be annexed contains 5.4 acres, 3 single family dwellings, a population of
9 and has an assessed value of $657,150.
2. The applicants desire City services to facilitate redevelopment of the property. An
attached residential development is planned for the site.
3. The only criterion for deciding city boundary changes within the statutes is the territory
must be contiguous to the City. However, the 1997 Legislature directed Metro to
establish criteria that must be used by all cities within the Metro boundary and Metro has
done so through adoption of Section 3.09 of the Metro Code.
To approve a boundary change. the City must:
(1) Find that the change is consistent with expressly applicable provisions in:
(A) Any applicable urban service agreement adopted pursuant to ORS
195.205;
(B) Any applicable annexation plan adopted pursuant to ORS
195.205;
(C) Any applicable cooperative planning agreement adopted pursuant
to ORS 195.020 (2) between the affected entity and a necessary
party;
(D) Any applicable public facility plan adopted pursuant to a statewide
planning goal on public facilities and services; and
(E) Any applicable comprehensive plan;
(F) Any applicable concept plan; and
(2) Consider whether the boundary change would:
(A) Promote the timely, orderly and economic provision of public
facilities and services;
(B) Affect the quality and quantity of urban services; and
(C) Eliminate or avoid unnecessary duplication of facilities and
services.
AN-0113 Findings - Page 1
Exhibit A
AN-0113
There are no cooperative agreements, urban service agreements or annexation plans
specifically adopted pursuant to ORS 195 in effect in this area. The proposal is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as stated in Findings 5-7.
4. This territory is inside Metro's jurisdictional boundary and inside the regional Urban
Growth Boundary (UGB).
The law which dictates that Metro adopt criteria for boundary changes specifically states
that those criteria shall ° . . . Ensure that a boundary change is in compliance with the
Metro regional framework plan, as defined in ORS 197.015, and cooperative agreements
and urban service agreements adopted pursuant to ORS Chapter 195." Metro's
Regional Framework Plan includes two adopted functional plans - the Urban Growth
Management Functional Plan and the Regional Transportation Plan,
The Regional Framework Plan, which includes the regional urban growth goals and
objectives, the Growth Management Functional Plan and the Regional Transportation
Plan were examined and found not to contain specific criteria applicable to boundary
changes.
5. As noted in Finding No. 3, the Metro Code states that the Council's decision on this
boundary change should be ". . . consistent with expressly applicable provisions" in any
applicable comprehensive plan. Thus the applicable plans must be examined for
"specific directly applicable standards or criteria."
The Washington County Comprehensive Plan is the applicable plan for this area.
The Washington County Bull Mountain Community Plan designates the area to be
annexed as R-15, Residential. This designation allows for densities of 12-15 units per
acre with 2100 square foot minimum lot sizes for detatched dwellings and 1600 square
feet for attached units.
6. Under the Washington County/King City Urban Planning Area Agreement (UPAA), the
City is responsible for preparing the public facilities plan required by OAR 660-11 within
the urban planning area. The City agrees to notify the County of any actions requiring a
hearings process which is quasi-judicial in nature. The notice is required to be made at
least 10 days prior to the hearing. The notice was provided more than ten days prior to
the Planning Commission hearing and the City Council hearing.
D. The CITY and the COUNTY agree that when annexation to the CITY takes place, the
transition in land use designation from one jurisdiction to another should be orderly,
logical and based on a mutually agreed upon plan.
1. For land which has COUNTY urban plan designations other than Future
Development 10 Acre (FD-10), upon annexation, the CITY agrees to convert
COUNTY plan designations to CITY plan and zone designations which most
AN-0113 Findings - Page 2
Exhibit A
AN-0113
closely approximate the density, use provisions and standards of the
COUNTY designations.
7. The Land Use Planning element of the City's Comprehensive Plan says that:
. . . The City will work toward establishing a mutually approved growth
management agreement with Washington County to ensure that:
b. Urban development inside King City's Urban Planning Area may
be allowed to annex to the City of King City in accordance with the
City Charter.
The Urbanization element of the plan contains the following:
Planning Responsibility and Annexation
New development standards and long range policy are now controlled by
Washington County for land outside the city limits. If land is annexed, the
responsibility shifts to the City. The City has an agreement with the County that a
"similar zoning" designation will be applied to land that might be annexed to King
City. As a result, annexation does not affect the basic uses allowed on properties
outside the City in the short term. The City does, however, have the ability to
amend land use policies and designations for annexed land as needs of the City
change.
The City of King City is an active municipality concerned with maintaining the
quality of life of its residents. The City recognizes that change and growth will
occur regardless of any action taken by the City government. By taking an active
role in the planning of areas which are undeveloped and within the City's UPA, the
City can guide the type and quality of developments that are compatible with the
original community.
A zone change from County R-15 to City R-12 is being processed in conjunction with this
annexation. A separate report covers that issue in detail.
8. ORS 195 requires agreements between providers of urban services. Urban services are
defined as: sanitary sewers, water, fire protection, parks, open space, recreation and
streets, roads and mass transit. These agreements are to specify which governmental
entity will provide which service to which area in the long term. The statute also
authorizes creation of annexation plans and annexation plan annexations subsequent to
adoption of urban services agreements. The counties are responsible for facilitating the
creation of the urban service agreements. The statute was enacted in 1993 but no ORS
195 urban service agreements or annexation plans involving King City have yet been
AN-0113 Findings - Page 3
Exhibit A
AN-0113
adopted.
9. Water service is provided to the City of King City via an intergovernmental agreement
with the City of Tigard. There is a 12 inch water line in SW 131 st adjacent to the west
edge of the property to be annexed and there is an 8 inch water line in SW Dickson
Street on the north edge of the property. The City may withdraw the territory from District
upon annexation. ORS 222.520, 222.120(5) and 222.465.
10. The City contracts with the Washington County's Clean Water Services District to provide
collector sewers in the City. Clean Water Services provides treatment and major
transmission lines to all of urbanized Washington County and provides collector service
to some urbanized unincorporated areas. Clean Water Services has sanitary sewer lines
adjacent to the territory to be annexed in SW 128" Avenue and SW 131 St Avenue.
11. Clean Water Services has responsibility for surface water management within the
Washington County urban growth boundary. Clean Water Services has entered into an
intergovernmental agreement with King City for allocation of the City and the Clean
Water Services responsibilities. The City owns the facilities but the District does the
maintenance.
12. Many recreational facilities in the City are owned, managed and operated by the
homeowners associations. The City has a 17 acre park on the southwest corner of the
City.
13. The territory is within the boundary of the Washington County Urban Road Maintenance
District. The City may withdraw the territory from the District upon annexation. ORS
222.520 and 222.120(5). If the City declares the territory withdrawn from the district on
the effective date of the annexation the District's tax levy value will no longer apply.
14. The territory is within the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District. The City
may withdraw the territory from the District upon annexation. ORS 222.520 and
222.120(5). If the City declares the territory withdrawn from the District on the effective
date of the annexation the District's tax levy value will no longer apply.
Upon annexation police services will be provided by the City Police department.
15. The territory is within the County Service District for Vector Control. The City may
withdraw the territory from the District upon annexation. ORS 222.520 and 222.120(5).
16. The area to be annexed is within Washington County Service District No. 1 for street
lights. The City may withdraw the territory from District upon annexation. ORS 222.520
and 222.120(5).
17. Planning and other services will be available from the City upon annexation.
AN-0113 Findings - Page 4
Exhibit A
AN-0113
CONCLUSIONS AND REASONS FOR DECISION
Based on the Findings the Council determined that:
1. The Metro Code calls for consistency with expressly applicable provisions of urban
service agreements adopted pursuant to ORS 195. The City is not a party to an urban
service agreement adopted pursuant to ORS 195. Therefore no inconsistencies exist.
2. The Metro Code requires consistency with expressly applicable provisions of any
applicable annexation plan adopted pursuant to ORS 195.205. The City does not have
an annexation plan that covers this area. Therefore the boundary change is not
inconsistent with any such plan.
3. Metro Code 3.09.045 (d) (1) (C) requires the Council to find that the boundary change is
consistent with any applicable cooperative planning agreement adopted pursuant to ORS
195.020 (2) between the City and a necessary party. The City is not a party to a
cooperative agreement required by ORS 195. Therefore the Council concludes the
proposal is consistent with this requirement.
4. The Metro Code at 3.09.045 (d) (1) (D) calls for consistency between the Council
decision and any "expressly applicable provisions" contained in any applicable public
facility plan adopted pursuant to a statewide planning goal on public facilities and
services. The City provides services in accord with its Public Facility Plan. Therefore
the Council concludes this decision is consistent with this requirement.
5. The Metro Code calls for consistency with expressly applicable provisions in any
applicable comprehensive land use plans. The County Comprehensive Plan anticipates
City annexations taking place in this area. The City Comprehensive Plan likewise
anticipates City annexation of this area. Neither Plan contains specific criteria to be met
as a condition of annexation approval. Therefore the Council finds no inconsistency with
expressly applicable provisions of applicable plans.
6. Metro Code 3.09.045 (d) (2) (A) requires consideration of whether the boundary change
would "Promote the timely, orderly and economic provision of public facilities and
services." All necessary urban services can be provided to the area via existing special
districts which overly the City or directly by the City. Therefore services will be available
in a timely, orderly and economic fashion.
7. The Metro Code at 3.09.045 (d) (2) (B) calls for consideration of whether the boundary
change will affect the quality and quantity of urban services. As noted in the reason
above and in Findings 9-16 all services will be available to the area of this proposed
boundary change.
8. The Council is to consider whether the boundary change would "Eliminate or avoid
unnecessary duplication of facilities or services." As the proposal is in accord with
applicable plans and all services are available, the Council concludes this criterion is
met.
AN-0113 Findings - Page 5