04/25/1977 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1) it was in the urban service boundary and conformed to the 1990 plan; 2) a full range of urban services could be provided; and 3) it was a logical expansion of city boundaries. e Public hearing was opened. Leigh Iverson, 2869 Taylor, identified himself as the applicant's representative. He concurred with staff findings, 'and sai d he was present to answer questions of Council. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. Res. No. 2659--Forwarding to Boundary Commission recommendation for annexation of property located east of Coburg Road directly south of Beltline Road was read by number and titl e. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Williams, to adopt the resolution. Mr. Bradley questioned the Staff Notes regarding a concern of creating a county island in regard to Tax Lot 900. Mr. Croteau said if this property were annexed, it would create an island of county property within the city. In the past, the City had attempted to annex in a logical manner to preclude such is- lands, but that such an annexation had been done in the past where owners were unwilling to annex. He said the owners of this par- ticular property had attended some of the past meetings, and were aware of the fact that they may have to be annexed to the city at some time in the future. - Mr. Bradley expressed a concern regarding the indication of this property as agricultural land as zoned by the County. He asked whether it was prime agricultural land and if LCDC would be willing to have it rezoned. Mr. Long said the LCDC had never taken the position on exception procedure, but that the City's position had been that the urban service boundary was valid and was irrevocably committed to that urban service boundary. Mr. Bradley questioned whether this annexation should be tabled for LCDC recommendation or action. Mayor Keller noted the LCDC had indicated it might take action at its next meeting to develop policy, but had not done so at this time. He said he was not sure it would serve any useful purpose to postpone action on this annexation, that the Council had an obligation to take a stand, based on the facts that had been presented. He felt as long as the annexation was compatible with past action and conformed to the City's past policies, that the Council should not wait for another government agency to dictate to the City Council what it should do. Mr. Bradley then asked if there was any indication as to the prox- imity of this property in regard to the recent Cone/Breeden annexation in that area. Mr. Croteau said the location was directly across the road to the north. Mr. Bradley then asked whether there were any indications regarding the property costs, capital outlay, and e 4/25/77 --8 ,3;;t5