Minutes-02/09/1983

The Tiffin City Council met in regular session on Wednesday, February 9, 1983 at the Tiffin Methodist Church. Mayor Potter called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Councilmembers present were Cox, Brown, Spivey, Rohret and Stevens. Also present were Barbara Bechtoldt, Attorney Hoefer, Engineer Kammerer, Richard Bryant, Greg Downes, Jerry Wear, Mr. and Mrs. Richard O'Keefe, Bill Grace, Ralph Stoffer, Judd TePaske and several members of the high school government class. No one spoke during community forum. Motion Spivey second Cox to approve agenda. Carried unanimously. Motion Rohret second Spivey to approve minutes of special and regular meetings January 12, 1983. Carried unanimously. Mr. TePaske explained the areas in the fringe area study. Areas 1 A and 1 B are treated separately because I-80 splits them apart. Areas 2 A and 2 B are treated separately because 2 B has highway frontage which might make it more conducive to commercial or light industrial. Rohret suggested 2 A as an agricultural area instead of residential. He pointed out that Tiffin has already annexed vast areas that do not have services and he sees no reason to annex more area. TePaske stated that the city does have obligation to supply services to other annexed area if requested and might want to leave some area in a non-developmental district. Potter pointed out that area 2 A has a natural fall and that 3 A probably needs lifts station to tie into utilities. TePaske stated that area 3 A does not appear to be an area considered for annexation. It already has a development under county plans and is a suburban residential area outside of town. TePaske stated that city should look at annexation only in ability to deliver services. Cox stated that 1 A and 1 B would be good for industry. Potter asked what the next step will be. TePaske asked for clarification on the 2 A areas. Rohret suggested deleting or halving the 2 A area. Brown pointed out that the study if not a commitment as far as annexation goes. Rohret stated that there is no need to extend the city further and that it is not feasible. TePaske stated that the study should enable the development of a written agreement so that there is a similar understanding between the property owners and the county about how and when to annex and/or develop. Hoefer asked if the county would pay attention to this study when it decided to zone. RePaske stated that the agreements would be taken into consideration and were especially important because the Coralville city limit is so close to Tiffin. Stevens pointed out that the only area of disagreement on the council was 2 A. He stated that 2 A is close to Tiffin and the utilities and should be kept as residential. He stated that it may not be developed for a long time but it is a logical place for development. TePaske stated that the recommendation could point out that it is a more long range area, but it does meet the physical standards for development.