SU0004272 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Minutes 20 June 7, 2005 Council Member Tucker asked how many units of water the church would require. Mr. Reeds responded one. Council Member Tucker asked if the policy would apply to the additional 30 vacant parcels in the Larch Clover area. Mr. Reeds indicated yes. Council Member Tolbert asked if there was a pending lawsuit in the area. Ms. Corbett stated there was a lawsuit resolved a couple years ago regarding a property wanting to develop a commercial project under the County agreement. Council Member Tolbert stated she was unclear on why the will serve letter was rescinded. Mr. Sharma stated the City agreed to allow the connection in anticipation of the annexation process. Council Member Talbert asked if it was Council direction to provide the will serve letter. Mr. Sharma stated it was discussed at public meetings. Council Member Tolbert asked if it was clear in the will serve letter that if the annexation failed the letter would be rescinded. Mr. Sharma stated all indications were that the annexation would proceed. Council Member Tolbert asked about a property on Valpico Road outside the City limits where the City was supplying water to a site. Ms. Corbett indicated the City was providing fire service and water only for those fire services. Ms. Corbett added that providing these vacant parcels with one ECU of water put them on equal ground with other people subject to the 1986 agreement. Council Member Tolbert stated she felt allowing the water was circumventing the annexation process. Council Member Tucker asked what the area was zoned for in the General Plan. Mr. Reeds stated the area was shown as commercial in the General Plan. Pastor Roger Rickman pointed out that the parcel the church was referring to, already had a house on it. Mayor Pro Tem Ives clarified that the application was not just for the church, but also for approximately 30 vacant parcels in the Larch Clover area. Council Member Tucker asked what the County's zoning was for the property. Mr. Reeds stated it was very low residential. Council Member Tucker stated she felt it was opening the door for future residential development if the parcels were given one ECU. Mr. Reeds stated the parcel Reverend Roland purchased had a home on it, but that the County recorded the parcel as a separate parcel, which is the only reason it is vacant, and therefore allowed him to apply for water under the policy. Pastor Roland explained that the property totaled 2.67 acres. The County said they could not purchase two acres and split the property. Pastor Roland added they purchased the entire 2.67 acres and signed a living trust with the owners of the home so they could remain in the home until they were both deceased. Pastor Roland provided the Council with a copy of both letters stating neither letter referenced any condition of annexation.