My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1/9/1985
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1985
>
1/9/1985
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:51:11 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 10:03:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
01/09/1985
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
59
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
A N <br />9 <br />1995e00K <br />�� <br />F�. F 4?9-- 3,: <br />land was <br />deducted from the assessment; unfortunately, <br />that <br />would <br />result in the rest of the people paying a little bit more. <br />Joe Earman, Mrs. Earman's son, agreed that the road needs to be <br />paved, but objected to the assessment. He advised that his father <br />sold the land to a developer who built the subdivision. He reported <br />that he checked with Architect Dave Robison and Engineer Jim Beindorf <br />about the frontyard and backyard setback requirements and found that <br />they just cannot build a house on the lot in question. In addition, <br />he pointed out that the lake now drains down on the south end in front <br />of his mother's summer house into her ditch, which is actually an old <br />overgrown agricultural ditch, and out to 8th Street (Glendale); it <br />does not go on County property. Mr. Earman advised that they are <br />willing to give an easement so that the lake can be drained out to <br />46th Avenue where a gate could be installed to maintain the level of <br />the lake. He ended by urging the Board to consider a more equitable <br />assessment on their property because the way it stands now, they would <br />be paying 20% of the total project. <br />Attorney Brandenburg advised that the County wants to get rid of <br />all those lakes, and they have suggested that Glendale Lakes property <br />owners form a homeowners' association to accept that particular lake. <br />However, there has not been any progress made in that direction. He <br />recommended that the County disclaim any interest it has in the lake <br />and execute a quit claim deed and give it back to the Earmans, or the <br />original developer of the subdivision, because there is no reason for <br />the County to have ownership of the bottom of those lakes. He noted <br />that even though there is no public access to the lake, it is a <br />constant headache because of the potential liability to the County. <br />Commissioner Bowman anticipated that the State will say that the <br />artesian wells will become plugged and the lake will turn into a <br />retention pond for a development. <br />Commissioner Bird was torn on the matter of the Earman property <br />benefiting by the paving of the road, but he did not know how we could <br />pull a compromise figure out of the air. <br />Director Davis advised that a survey would have to be done in <br />order to subtract the Earman property out of the assessment. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.