HUMBOLDT — A dozen people with property interests on the east fringe of town expressed concerns here Wednesday night about a comprehensive plan that gives direction to Humboldt’s growth.
The forum was a joint meeting of Humboldt’s council and its planning commission, whose members over the past year put the plan together.
Fred Works, city attorney, tried repeatedly to defuse opposition by noting the plan was not meant as a precursor to extraterritorial zoning or forced annexation. Rather, he said, it is a blueprint to identify routes along which utilities could be extended north and east. Monarch Cement’s plant to the south and the Neosho River’s flood plain to the west preclude growth in those directions.
K-224, access route to U.S. 169 at the northeast edge of town, is anticipated as the primary route along which commercial development would occur; Georgia Road, the hard-surfaced road running east from Humboldt’s mid-section, is anticipated to carry most residential development. Pine Street, which becomes Florida Road outside the southeast city limit, and two north-south routes also are mentioned in the plan.
Extraterritorial zoning within three miles of Humboldt was put to bed a year ago, before a swell of opposition and no encouragement from Allen County commissioners, who would have had to agreed to it, said Larry Tucker, city administrator.
That directed planning commission members on a year-long effort that resulted Wednesday night’s plan, Tucker added.
He, as did Works, stressed the plan had nothing to do with zoning or annexation, although it does mention the city would entertain requests for annexation, a prerequisite for attaching to city utility lines, now and into the future.
GEORGE ARD said he thought “this is a one-man deal,” referring to Tucker, for whom he had no kind words. Ard, who owns 17.5 acres just outside the city, also said he feared increased taxes.
Ken Heisler, who owns Eastside Tire along Georgia Road, proposed the plan and conversations about commercial development along U.S. 169, ran counter to efforts to revitalize downtown Humboldt.
He also maintained the only influence Humboldt would have in land-use changes outside its limits would be as a third party if Allen County, which has all unincorporated areas zoned, decided a request for change.
Heisler noted utility easements crossed land he owned and doubted if the city could win approval for laying utilities on K-224’s state-owned right of way.
Dale Wiles, whose property north of Humboldt isn’t immediately affected, recalled that in 1970 Rural Water District No. 9 had to get permission from every landowner whose land its line crossed, even to the point the line once was moved to the other side of 1200 Street, then U.S. 169, because of a contrary owner.
His point was landowners would have control if the city sought easements outside public rights of way.
“I think people think there’s more to the plan than what there is,” Works interjected. “No. 1, it gives the city no control over land. The owner of the land determines how it will be used.
“And No. 2, the plan only identifies direction for growth and logical places (rights of way) for utilities.”
The city’s intent, he added, was to be proactive if development were proposed and be able to determine if the proposal were economicly feasible for Humboldt.
