04/26/1976 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

subject to its connection to sewer service. Manager noted that the various dates given in a newspaper article with regard to the Mitchell property were inaccurate. He said issuance of a building permit by May 1, as stated, could not possibly occur because annexation of the property could not possibly be finalized by . that time. ~ ' Public hearing was opened. Jerry Gauche, 915 Oak Street #2, was in favor of the annexation. He said he had II-B-2 been working on the development of the Mitchell property, the last piece of developable land in the South Goodpasture Island area, in conjunction with both the city and county. Both recognize the area inevitably will become a part of the city, and he said he had confirmed the fact that sewer capacity would be available to the property. In fact, an offer by the land owners had been made and was still open to construct the system to serve this property at their ex- pense. Not only would that save the city some expense, he said, but it would also provide capacity to serve properties beyond them who are now essentially blocked off. He thought annexation wuld relieve the strain on city staff in trying to controldeve-opment of the area without authority other than through withholding city services. He said the proposed development of the Mitchell property was consistent with the general development of that area and the over- all plan. Robert F. Jackson, 450 Goodpasture Island Road, resident of the mobile home park, said he had been opposed to annexation of that area. However, he withdrew his objection on learning that the mobile home park was not included in the annexa- tion proposal. Margaret Holemar, 1379 Mill Street, ,owner of about 3.5 acres at the southeast corner of the annexation area, did not want that property annexed. She said that although it was used for residential purposes, it was assessed commercial- ly because of the adjacent commercial uses - Valley River. She suggested all of those properties not receiving sewer services under contractual arrangement be deleted from the annexation area until they were able to develop to com- mercial use also. She recommended more adequate notice of future hearings with regard to annexation, and that no further contractual agreements be made for annexation because of the distress for those people living next to such properties. She said they were being "totally taxes out, yet can't develop" their land. Jim Brown, 3760 Willarnette Street, and Clarence Brown, 2480 Lawrence Street, owners of the Howell, Smith, Brown property, and Ellis Jones, 1030 Coburg Road, were also opposed to the annexation. The Browns noted that when their prop- erty was annexed they were led to believe sewer capacity would be available, also that the property could be developed on a commercial basis. They cited changes in the Goodpasture Island area since then which made their land less valuable, and they felt other properties should not be annexed and receive sewer service when their land could not have the same service - until services were available to all areas inside the city, other areas should not be annexed. Mr. Jones cited lack of proper sewer service as his reason for objecting to the annexation and the cost of private systems to owners of property served by them. He thought there was discrimination in the way sewer service had been provded, in the tax deferments, and in the lack of notice of public hearings when older properties in the area were annexed. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony p~esented. 4/26/76 -8 ~d...9... ct.. ~' II-Be II-B-4 II-B-5 III-A-l -.....,./ .