Council holds public hearings on two annexation requests; no action taken
Loading...
Summary
City planners presented two public hearings on proposed annexations — a 3.7-acre parcel on North Jackrabbit Trail and a multi-parcel request at Verrado Way and Yuma Road — with no council action required tonight.
The Buckeye City Council held public hearings on two separate annexation petitions but took no action on either item, as both requests were for initial hearings required before any ordinance would be considered.
Andrea Marquez, senior planner with Development Services, presented item 5A, a blank annexation petition recorded January 6 seeking annexation of one parcel of about 3.7 acres at 600 North Jackrabbit Trail. Marquez said the site is presently county-jurisdiction land used for manufacturing prefabricated wood wall panels and that the applicant requests city light industrial zoning equivalent to the county’s Industrial 2. She told the council that all required notices had been completed, neighbors had asked questions but no substantive public opposition had been received, and that an ordinance would be scheduled for the March 4 council meeting.
The council then held item 5B, a public hearing on an annexation at the southwest corner of Verrado Way and Yuma Road. Senior planner Mandy Woods described the request as comprising eight parcels and right of way; during her presentation she stated the area “is just under a 68 acres.” (The published agenda item text at the start of the hearing described the total as “approximately 167.8 acres”; the staff presentation and subsequent discussion repeatedly referred to a smaller area “just under a 68 acres.”) Woods said notices were completed, departments had no outstanding issues, and that consideration of an approving ordinance would be scheduled at a future council meeting. When asked whether the annexation included any portion of Verrado Way or the adjacent bridge over the Roosevelt Canal, Woods replied that the petition included a portion of right of way and likely included the bridge if that segment was not already in the city.
No members of the public requested to speak on either annexation during the hearings. Council members did not take action tonight; staff will return with ordinance language and final materials at a future meeting for council consideration.
