My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/18/1986
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1986
>
11/18/1986
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:53:20 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 1:16:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
11/18/1986
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
107
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
Mr. Fuster informed the Board that the property is extremely <br />densely covered with underbrush and trees; so, just to see where <br />the house would be placed,.they had to clear the area where they <br />thought the house pad would go. He advised that he next con- <br />tacted the Forestry Division for burning of the trees and <br />underbrush, and they told him that the dry lake beds would be an <br />excellent place to burn. They did not dig out the pond, but <br />cleared the area around it. Mr. Fuster stated that all they have <br />done so far is obtain permits for septic, and the permits for the <br />pond are under way. They have to have a survey to get the <br />permits, and they couldn't do a survey unless they cleared for <br />the ponds. In addition, there is a drainage ditch which is <br />required by the county for drainage off the property; so, they <br />also got a culvert permit. Mr. Fuster noted that there has been <br />an allegation that they are putting in a subdivision, but they <br />are not; all they are putting in is just one house. <br />Mr. Fuster believed there is a conflict in the county's <br />ordinances. He was told by the building permit office that if <br />you are building a single family residence, no permits are needed <br />because the "tree cops" are too busy to check out each individual <br />property, but apparently there is another ordinance that he was <br />not informed of which says if the property is larger than one <br />acre, they do get involved. He continued to emphasize that they <br />have not cleared other than for one house and less than one acre. <br />As to an allegation about a roadway, there is no roadway other <br />than the culvert area to this building site. Along the east <br />perimeter of the property where the drainage ditch is going to be <br />placed, there has been some clearing for the ditch, and that is <br />the extent of it. <br />Chairman Scurlock asked Mr. Ward as a contractor whether he <br />was familiar with the county ordinance and why a permit was not <br />obtained. <br />Mr. Ward stated that basically underbrushing is all that was <br />done, no clearing. <br />Actually there was nothing on the property <br />79 <br />BOOK 66 mu 449 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.