1/30/1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

�J Discussion continued regarding all the costs and factors that need to be considered in regard to each site, and Commissioner Bowman asked what would be the bottom line on each of these two parcels. Commissioner Scurlock noted that both of them are asking over appraisal, but the Catron property is less over. The Monroe property is probably of insufficient acreage without a consider- able amount of soil work, and it is also further away so you would have additional collection costs. Director Pinto believed the Monroe property would require $300,000 worth of improvements to the ground. Commissioner Wodtke inquired if it would ever be possible to use the effluent for watering the citrus, and Director Pinto stated that is in their long range thinking. He believed we are looking at a plant of 4-5 million gpd. The one million storage on site would be about 25% of optimum capacity, and we would have to provide probably 72 hours of storage on site to guarantee a quality that can be used for irrigation. He noted that Orlando is going to use effluent for irrigation of groves, but there is a question about what they will be allowed to do with the fruit that is so irrigated. Administrator Wright pointed out that there is a golf course proposed near the intersection of SR 60 and I-95 that will want effluent. Attorney Garris informed the Board that he did reach his clients this morning. He pointed out that a broker came to them about the property; they did not go to the County; and this broker said the County was willing to pay $9,400 an.acre. The Monroes had an offer of $7,500 an acre and turned it down. Attorney Garris stated that he had some trouble with the appraisal, but his clients will accept $425,000 net to them if the County will assume the brokerage fee. He felt that brings the two properties into relative comparison. The Broker's fee was 10%, but Attorney Garris believed this can be negotiated. 21 JAN 3 0 1985 BOOK