HUMBOLDT — With well over an hour of commentary and explanations under their belts Wednesday evening, a dozen landowners living just outside Humboldt mostly agreed that a 10-year comprehensive plan being considered by the Planning Commission wouldn’t threaten their property rights.
“It’s a forward-looking vision, just a plan, so if an opportunity for development happens we’ll have a plan for how to deal with it,” said Fred Works, the city’s attorney.
The plan includes the likely routes for extended utilities outside the city — along K-224, Georgia and Florida roads and 1100 and 1400 streets.
“It’s all about putting a pipe in a ditch,” Works said.
An important aside to the development plan is budgeting funds needed for future utility extensions.
“We don’t have any money set aside right now,” said City Administrator Larry Tucker, for such an endeavor.
Works also stressed easements across private property were not anticipated, but if one were necessary it could occur only with the landowner’s permission.
City council members have had previous hearings on the plan. Two particular parts have raised an uproar: a map outlining extraterritorial zoning within three miles of Humboldt, primarily along the north and east sides; and a paragraph saying “it is not the recommendation” of the planners they consider forced annexation.
“Recommendation” was the operative word and stoked fears among property owners that annexation was on the city’s mind, and would lead to zoning regulations and higher taxes.
Changes to the plan were the crux of Wednesday’s hearing.
The first: “The proposed extraterritorial map was for historical purposes only. The city will rely on Allen County to notify it whenever a zoning issue within the three-mile radius of Humboldt comes before the county Planning Commission. The city has no plans to extend its zoning authority.”
The extraterritorial zoning issue arose a year ago and never got far. County commissioners would have had to sign off on it. They were skeptical from first blush and never gave any indication they would agree. Now, said Tucker, it is a dead issue.
The second: “The comprehensive plan does not include forced annexation of any property to accomplish the goals stated herein.” Stricken was introductory clause that said it was not the recommendation of the Planning Commission to use the comprehensive plan to propose forced annexation.
While the plan “has nothing to do with annexation,” Works pointed out that annexation was a statutory right given to the city with or without the comprehensive plan, one the city had “yesterday, today and will have 10 years from now,” but also one that comes with very specific rights for property owners.
If it were island zoning — meaning a property was not contiguous to the city — the county’s planning commission and the commissioners would become involved.
“This is a forward-thought process, a good idea to be prepared and (a way) to put some money away in the event anyone ever comes to the city and wants utilities extended,” Works said.
