04/26/1976 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

Resolution No. 2502 - Forwarding to Boundary Commission recommenda- tion to annex the South Goodpasture Island area as proposed was read by number and title. Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Haws to adopt the resolution. Councilman Bradley noted that the county by way of an order of intent had indicated the Mitchell property would be zoned RP upon connectio~ to sewer lines, which could be accomplished only through annexation. Heoexpressed con- cern about another jurisdiction's determining use of property that soon would be within the city. Even if the city denied the annexation, he$aid, the Boundary Commission could order it annexed. He was also concer~ed about the lack of consideration for public need for the RP use. He felt the Planning Commission should look at that property to determine whether st~ndards had been met. He suggested segregation of that parcel for referral~to the Plan- ning Commission. Mr. Saul thought certain factors should be considered in lookin~at the county's action. He said decisions on large properties such as in the Gopdpasture Is- land area mostly were made prior to the adoption or the metropo~ltan plan. Recommendation for annexation in the present manner would dispose of problems encountered because of overlapping jurisdictional actions. Beca,tise of delays as the result of law suits and the owner's desire to develop th~ Mitchell property, the zoning was sought under the county. " Councilman Hamel noted the debate over the Goodpasture Island properties had covered some period of time, and there had been annexations cre~ting "islands out of islands." He suggested proceeding with annexation of pr~perties where owners wanted them annexed, deleting properties where owners wele opposed to annexation, then go from there. e Councilman Keller asked if properties, merely because of the fact they were annexed, would have priority so far as city services were concerned. Mr. Allen answered that there was existing capacity to serve the parcels included in this annexation proposal under the allocation outlined, excluding co~ercial develop- ment for the Holemar property.! ,. Mr. Bradley moved second by Mr. Haws to amend the resoluti~n so as to delete the Mitchell property from the area proposed for ,annexa- tion and refer that portion (Mitchell property) to the Planning Commission for an advisory opinion with regard to the demonstration of public need for RP zoning. In making the motion, Mr. Bradley explained that he thought there should be some kind of determination that a public need truly exists. He saidthe was not sure of the kinds of evidence presented to the County Commissioners in their determina- tion to file an order of intent to rezone to RP. He questioned the need for additional office space in light of the high vacancy factor in the downtown area. Also, the procedure bothered him - the county's rezoning an area soon to be annexed to the city with no evaluation of the question by the city itself. Councilman Williams assumed the decision to rezone, being a judicial decision, was made by the county under the same legal standards govering the Council in its deliberations of like issues. Also, he thought if the county had failed to make a proper judicial determination, the city would have the clear right to correct that defect after the property was annexed. Councilman Bradley commented that the property was not yet rezoned, the county had issued only an order of intent to rezone with the contingency provision that sewer service would be available only through annexation to the city. 4/26/76 - 10 ~ d.. 'i ~ '-"" e -...../ -