02/28/1977 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. fire protection areavailable to the property. Mr. Saul said that at the time of the public hearing by the Planning Commission, a number of people in the area had expressed concern over the effect the development of this parcel would have on the street and questioned the feasibility of access on Spring Boulevard for fire equipment to the site. He said that several members of the Planning Commission were concerned regarding the fire equipment's ability to negotiate Spring Boulevard, as it is a very narrow street, and had used this as a basis for their negative votes. He said subsequent to the Planning Commission hearing, a review with the Fire Chief indicated that fire equipment could negotiate Spri ng Boul evard and, in fact, the Fi re Department woul d prefer to have this property in the City as it would provide fire pro- tection for that development. Public testimony was opened. - David Pederson, 440 2nd Avenue; Herb Nill, 2140 Essex; George Mast, 1648 East 23rd; and Jan Hansen, 277 Spring Boulevard; all spoke in favor of the annexation of the Lemke property. Some of the points raised were: The conditions of the sur- rounding streets should not be a legal basis for considering annexation of some property; the property in question would be considerably upgraded and more in conformance with the neighborhood; the street needs to be improved, and will be if it is annexed to the city; the Association of General Contractors supports the annexation as it would provide work for many contractors who are now out of work; and that the increase in traffic should not be a basis for not annexing as there would be only six lots developed and it would not cause that much .more traffic. Everett L. Holdren, 2109 Essex Lane, spoke against the annex- ation, representing the Fairmount Neighbors. He said the group was opposed to the annexation and the development of the property citing the increased traffic on narrow Spring Boulevard, and the fact that the development would alter the quality of the nei ghborhood. He sai d he objected to the annexati on as a citi zen who would have to pay for some of the street improvements. David Edmington, 3145 Whitten; Shannon McCarthy-Dodson, 2285 East 29th Avenue; Ray Dodson, 2285 East 29th Avenue; Judi I-brstmann, 1835 East 28th; and George Mayer, 2850 Spring Boulevard; all indicated opposition to the annexation. They cited the follow- ing reasons: the increase of traffic on narrow Spring Boulevard; the improvement would upset the balance of the neighborhood; the fact the fire trucks would be unable to set up because of overhead wires and only one fire hydrant in the area; the doubt of the City's ability to improve the road; the fact many people who live in the neighborhood wish it to remain as it is; the difficulty of entering and getting out of driveways. e Public testimony was closed, there being no further testimony presented. 2/28/77--5 ILfI