9/25/1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

situation, which way the homes presently there face, how they may face on the vacant lots in the future, the need for the road to be paved as required by our ordinance, county policy re half streets, etc., and Chairman Lyons stated that he has great difficulty in asking the people who face 12th St.�,,to pay a petition paving assessment for 11th Lane for which they actually have no use. Director Keating noted that the double frontage was developed when Dixie Heights was created, and there will be additional lots to the west in the future. The reason we have the requirement for the developer to pave roads contiguous is that this is the point in time where we have some leverage over the people. After further debate, County Attorney Vitunac pointed out that one of the guiding lights in petition paving is the amount of benefit everyone gets, and we could adjust the assessment per the benefit received. Commissioner Scurlock inquired how the residents would feel if the assessment were adjusted with the developer making up the difference, and Mrs. Bean felt they would not be totally in favor of it but believed they would go along with it. Gary Stafford, 334 12th St. S.W., stated that all of those Mrs. Bean spoke for face 12th St., and he did not see any benefit to them in sharing in the cost of paving 11th Court. Dan Fleischman, 450 11th Lane S.W., stated that actually he is not involved in this since the paving would end about two lots before him, but the reason he came is that the developer con- vinced his wife that they were involved and also convinced her. that this was settled last week. He, therefore, questioned Mr. Lawhon's creditability, and believed that instead of improving the area he has degraded it by putting a mining pit about 10-20' deep on the corner of 11th Lane and Old Dixie. Mr. Fleischman felt Mr. Lawhon should put in his own road or at least make up the difference. 52 SEP 5 1985 BOOK U� PAGE