Laserfiche WebLink
choose an appraiser, and the two appraisers would choose a <br />third appraiser to appraise the property in question as RS-3 <br />before any development approval was done. <br /> <br />Under discussion, the Board agreed that the Developer’s Agreement would come <br />back to the Board after the appraisals have been received. <br /> <br />The Chairman CALLED THE QUESTION and the motion <br />carried unanimously. (The Board denied the Developer’s <br />Agreement \[Alternative No. 2\] with 510 Development <br />Group, L.L.C., as recommended in the memorandum of <br />November 29, 2005. In addition, it was agreed that the <br />County and the Developer would each select an appraiser <br />who would select a third appraiser and each of the three <br />appraisers would bring back their appraisal of the subject <br />property considering it as undeveloped land with RS-3 <br />zoning.) (CLERK’S NOTE: It was decided, after a brief <br />recess, that the cost of the three appraisals shall be split <br />50-50 between the Developer and the County. \[see below\]) <br /> <br />The Chairman called a brief recess at 10:46 a.m. The meeting resumed at 10:55 a.m. <br />with all members present. Upon their return to the table, it was learned the Commissioners had not <br />determined who would pay for the appraisals on the last item. <br /> <br />ON MOTION by Vice Chairman Neuberger, SECONDED <br />by Commissioner Bowden, the Board unanimously agreed <br />to split the costs for the three appraisals 50-50. <br /> <br />December 6, 2005 35 <br /> <br />