Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Annexation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council passes first reading 9-0 to annex Nichols lot along 200 South
Summary
The Columbus City Council voted 9-0 on first reading to advance an ordinance to annex a little more than one acre owned by Darrell and Melanie Nichols into the city to allow city sewer and water service; the Planning Commission recommended approval Feb. 12.
The Columbus City Council voted 9-0 on first reading March 18 to advance Ordinance No. 2025, a request to annex a slightly more-than-one-acre lot owned by Darrell and Melanie Nichols into the city limits so the property can connect to Columbus City sewer and water utilities.
City planning staff told the council the parcel, along 200 South near Shadow Creek Farms, is currently zoned RS2 (single-family residential) and the applicant does not propose a zoning change. The annexation, staff said, would include the right-of-way along 200 South and meets the city’s contiguity standard (staff estimated approximately 50% contiguity, above the 12.5% threshold).
Planning staff said city departments had reviewed the request and confirmed they could provide services to the property upon annexation. The annexation request carried a unanimous favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission on Feb. 12. Council members who voted on first reading were Frank Miller, Kent Anderson, Jerome Wood, Elaine Hilber, Chris Bartels, Grace Kessler, Tom Dowell, Josh Burnett and Jay Boyce.
Council action at the March 18 meeting was limited to the ordinance’s first reading. A council member moved to pass the ordinance on first reading and place it in proper channels; the motion was carried on the roll-call vote recorded as 9-0. Staff said a second reading is scheduled for the council meeting on April 15.
Why it matters: Annexation will allow the property owners to access city sewer and water and aligns with the city’s comprehensive plan future land use map that shows residential growth along that corridor. The City’s adopted annexation policies and the planning commission recommendation indicate the request is intended to promote an efficient city boundary pattern for service provision.
The council did not discuss a zoning change or any specific development plan beyond the applicants’ stated intent to build a single-family home. No public comments were offered on the item at the meeting.
