7/14/1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Equipment can be purchased and personnel hired to work this area on a continuing basis. Perhaps lots can be purchased for drainage retention areas. The exist- ing drainage situation is not adequate. This alternative would relieve the general burden that all tax payers are now subsidizing, and impact to the County Road and Bridge Division would be minimized. Alternative No. 2 The County presently maintains only a portion (approximately 300) of the roads in this area. In 1980, the County took the position that no additional roads or drainage facilities would be maintained. As a result, some platted lots are inaccessible. This condition can remain under this present policy and the County continue to take this posture. The existing burden of main- taining those roads presently maintained continue to be shared by all tax payers. Recommendations and Funding It is recommended that the County Public Works Director, County Attorney, and County Administrator be authorized to proceed in implementing Alternative No. 1 whereby a Municipal Service Taxing Unit be established for road and drainage improvements and maintenance. A report will be prepared and submitted to the Board of County Commissioners for approval. There are no funding con- siderations at this time. Mr. Davis emphasized that the impact as this subdivision, which contains about 9,000 lots, builds out, could be devastating to the Public Works Department operation. Many of these lots were bought years ago by individual owners, and it was Mr. Davis' recommendation that the Board consider setting up a Special Taxing District for roads and drainage in this area to deal with this problem before we are overcome by it. He continued that he had been told of a very old drainage district in this area, which has been dormant for years, and he would like to pursue that to see if it can be restored. If not, he felt the only recourse is an MSTU for road maintenance and drainage in this area. Commissioner Lyons commented on the suggestion made re purchasing some of these lots for drainage retention areas, and Mr. Davis explained that there is no way this area could handle a built -out situation since everything is channeled into the 510 canal, which is the only canal outfall. He felt the proper procedure would be to formulate a complete drainage plan for the area while it is still relatively undeveloped. 28 JUL 14 1982 B90K 50 PACE 468 0