Laserfiche WebLink
an 62 FA ,8 <br />Mr. Lawhon felt there was a misunderstanding before when the <br />Board turned down the request for petition paving and directed <br />him to pave the complete street when there are 19 lot owners on <br />it and only 7 lots on his side of the street. He stated that it <br />would cost him $32,000 to pave this piece of street. - <br />Commissioner Scurlock inquired just what has changed since <br />the previous meeting, and Mr. Lawhon emphasized that there now is <br />no confusion about them having 670 of the property owners signing <br />the petition. <br />Director Davis confirmed that some confusion arose previ- <br />ously due to a husband/wife situation where the title to the <br />property was in the wife's name and the husband tried to withdraw <br />the property from the petition. Also, people came in to speak in <br />opposition who owned property beyond the limits of the project. <br />The longer project did not become the scope of work that was <br />finally petitioned. <br />Discussion followed as to how many property owners still are <br />opposed, and it was noted that there are signatures from property <br />owners owning 67% of the frontage, but this actually is five out <br />of 11 property owners. The 67% does meet our criteria for <br />paving. <br />It was determined that no one else wished to be heard at <br />this time, but it was also noted there had been no notice of <br />surrounding owners. <br />MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED <br />by Commissioner Bowman to reconsider the issue and <br />set a time certain for another hearing. <br />Mrs. Lawhon informed the Board that she and Mr. Lawhon <br />realize it is not fair for people whose houses face a different <br />street to have to pay for the paving, and they will pay the cost <br />for those owners and pay it in advance, if necessary. They would <br />like to get on with this project. <br />40 <br />