Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> ] <br /> r <br /> council bill number and title only, there being no Council member . <br /> present requesting that it be read in full. <br /> Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mr. Hamel that findings supporting <br /> the rezoning as set out in Planning Commission staff notes and <br /> mi nutes of May ~, If:J77, be adopted by reference thereto; that <br /> the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, <br /> with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be <br /> considered at this time. Vote was taken on the motion with <br /> Councilors Williams, Delay, Haws, Hamel, Lieuallen, and Smith <br /> voting aye; drad1ey voting no; and Obie abstaining. Lacking <br /> unanimous consent, the council bill will be held for second <br /> readi ng June 17, If:J77. <br /> 1-B-2 F. Rezonings and annexations <br /> 1. Located between Berte1 sen Road and Four Oaks Grange Roa(1 sout'h <br /> of West 1tith Avenue (Stults) (A/Z 77-1) (Rouch) (AIZ 77-2) <br /> from County RA to C i ty R-1. <br /> Manager noted the rezoning and annexation had been recommended by <br /> Planning Commission at its May 9, 1~77, meeting. Ji m Saul, Pl anni ng <br /> Department, said there were two separate annexations being petitioned <br /> by Mr. Stults and Mr. Rouch involving Tax Lots 1400 and ltiOU. He <br /> sa i d the 1-'1 anni ng Commi ss i on and Ci ty Council had cons i dered several <br /> annexations in the area in the last few years. The Planning COlOO1is- <br /> sion had determined this property was within the projected Urban <br /> Services Boundary, that the full range of services could be provided, . <br /> and it was consistent with the General Plan for annexation. One cri- <br /> terion for annexation is a consideration of whether it would result <br /> in a logical city boundary. It would be more desirable if Tax Lots <br /> 15UU, 17UU, and 19UU were included, but the occupants of those <br /> parcels did not wish to be annexed at this time.. <br /> 1't1r. Saul continued, in 1975, the Planning Commission had considered <br /> annexation for Mr. Rouch but opposition from several neighbors re- <br /> sulted in the request being withdrawn prior to consideration by City <br /> Council. The Planning Commission felt the annexation 'would meet all <br /> other criteria and recommended approval. It would be for low-density <br /> single-family housing and would meet the General Plan criteria for <br /> the area. <br /> Public hearing was opened. <br /> Eugene Rouch, 211U Four Oaks Grange Road, identified himself as one of <br /> the app 1 i cants. He sai din his pri or app 1 i cati on there had been objec- <br /> tions from surrounding property owners but that at this time there were <br /> none. His reasons for seeking annexation were because of minor septic <br /> tank prOblems and a desire for city police protection. <br /> Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony <br /> presented. <br /> Resolution 267ti--Forwarding to Boundary Commission recolOO1endation for . <br /> annexation area located between Bertelsen Road and Four Oaks Grange <br /> Road south of West ltith Avenue was read by number and title. <br /> 6/13 /77 - t1 <br /> Lfll <br />