Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Annexation Tarragon topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves Tarragon annexation after staff-recommended boundary modification
Summary
The Uniontown City Council voted to approve Resolution 18-77, accepting a modified annexation request from developer Tarragon covering roughly 18 acres. Staff said the annexation would connect to existing stubbed utilities and the applicant offered to help cover review costs.
Uniontown — The City Council on May 11 approved Resolution 18-77 to accept a modified annexation petition from Tarragon for about 18 acres on the city’s east side.
City staff presented the proposal and recommended adjusting the original request from three large parcels to six parcels to regularize the city boundary and include nearby roadways. Chris Bass, the city director presenting the staff report, said the area is zoned R-2 (low-density residential) in the comprehensive plan and noted water and sewer stub-outs are nearby. He also said the county assessor’s 2026 valuation for the area is roughly $4,000,000.
Two public speakers backed the annexation. Alex Campbell, a resident who said he lives outside the city, emphasized the benefits of extending utilities and road connections and noted Tarragon’s willingness to reimburse the city for review costs. The applicant’s representative (identifying as Chappardew) told council Tarragon sees the annexation as consistent with the city’s comprehensive plan and highlighted expected fiscal and infrastructure benefits.
Council debated and voted; the mayor announced the motion passed with five yes votes and one no. No council member names were recorded with the roll call in the transcript.
The approval sets in motion the statutory next steps for annexation (staff said the city will set dates required by state law for boundary review and further proceedings). The staff report noted that, if approved, the annexed parcels would adopt the city’s future land-use and zoning designations.
The council also noted the applicant’s offer to help defray processing costs; staff earlier described hiring a consultant to process annexations as potentially requiring significant staff time and consultant fees.
