9/25/1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

SEP 25 1985 BOOK� F'�1G.t 2� Commissioner Scurlock stated that we do want to get the right-of-way whenever we can get it, but we don't want to get right-of-way that we will never use and that causes an undue burden. Director Davis felt there will be a need for the right-of-way on Old Dixie probably within 20 years, but not for a major four laning - just to mitigate the intersections, accesses onto the road, etc. Attorney O'Haire stated that the County cannot require the right-of-way legally unless the requirement is tied to the impact of what is taking place on the property. Attorney Vitunac confirmed that any time the impact of the project is far less than the requirement for the road right-of-way, you have the issue of an invalid taking without compensation. Chairman Lyons asked what action the Attorney would suggest, and Attorney Vitunac believed the Board should ask their professionals if the impact of this property warrants the requirement of this right-of-way. Director Keating stating that staff's position is that the impact of this project is not consistent with the improvement required, but felt there is a deficiency somewhere if every time there is a site plan, staff has to determine whether or not the impact is greater than the benefit. Commissioner Scurlock asked the County Attorney if he felt there is a latitude for the Board to require the right-of-way without changing the ordinance, and Attorney Vitunac believed the Board can find that it is unconstitutional to do that here and can direct staff to look at at again. It was his opinion that we would stand a substantial chance of losing this case if it went to court. Discussion followed as to finding a vehicle to deal with this situation, and Commissioner Wodtke noted that in the case in question today, the 7' of right-of-way would result in making one 61