Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Annexation And Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges council to halt annexation; council adds language to protect existing structures
Summary
Affected property owner Molly Westman told the St. James City Council the city gave inadequate notice and urged staff to stop annexation proceedings; staff said they will add ordinance language to grandfather existing nonconforming structures and the council approved the zoning-first-reading language with that protection included.
Molly Westman, an affected property owner, urged the St. James City Council to halt the city's annexation and related zoning actions affecting multiple parcels, saying residents received inadequate notice and that the city had not shown urgent service needs that would compel annexation now.
"At no point in this process has the city clearly articulated a necessity that compels annexation at this time," Westman said, asking the council to direct staff to stop the annexation of the Monsterman, Sorenson and Westman parcels and to revise the process to require meaningful notice and engagement.
Westman said the city's materials framed annexation as driven by service needs but that, in her view, services on the properties have not materially changed; she also said that owners received a letter on Nov. 1 only three days before a council meeting and that planning staff had met the township before notifying property owners.
City staff responded that they would add explicit language to the proposed zoning ordinance to recognize and preserve existing nonconforming structures (such as oversized sheds and agricultural buildings) so those structures would be allowed to remain without requiring special-use permits or variances. "The language I'm suggesting puts it into the ordinance itself so that there's no question going forward that that is allowed," a staff member said.
Council members debated whether postponing the zoning designation would stop the annexation; staff clarified that the joint resolution approving annexation had been approved at the Nov. 4 meeting and that the zoning ordinance designates the district once the land becomes part of the city. Council then approved, on first reading, ordinance language that includes the proposed grandfathering of nonconforming structures.
The council did not reverse the annexation at the meeting. Westman and other residents asked for clearer procedures and earlier, direct notification in future annexation processes. The council's immediate action was to include the staff-recommended nonconforming-use language in the ordinance; further procedural changes or a formal halt to annexation were not adopted at this session.
What happens next: the council approved the first reading of the zoning ordinance with the added protection language; the ordinance will return for subsequent readings or further action consistent with the council's rules.
