10/11/1988 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the project and the resulting assessments were discussed. Some of the complaints appear to have a position that merits consideration by the Board. One of the reasons for the high project cost is because there is $60,245.00 included in the cost for parcel owners for 1500 linear feet of State owned and non -developable land and an expensive crossing over the South Relief Canal. It was expressed that the inclusion of these costs in the parcel owners assessments for this project only was,an unfair allocation to this particular project. The Utilities Services Department judges that the owner's complaint has merit and that the Commissioners could well consider County Utility separate funding of the $60,245.00 cost. Such a decision would reduce the total project assessed cost from $276,690.00 to a Final Assessed Cost of $216,445.00 and could reduce individual assessments approximately 19%. The second matter that appears -to merit your evaluation concerns both water and sewer systems installations construction timing. The Utilities Services Department is now in the process of negotiations with the State Department of Transportation. DOT has a current project for widening U.S. #1 through the subject water installation project area. The purpose of this discussion with the State is to coordinate the thoroughfare widening with the County water installation project. This would mean that the -State will piclip the costs for post construction restoration an additional saving of approximately $20,000.00Ifor those assessed. This will delay project ctonstruction probably until June, 1989, but has the advantage of making it also a summer rather than peak season project. With adoption of this construction program another issue is raised. The Utilities Services Departmeryt hereby recommends that the engineering for a sewer line on theestside of U.S. #1 from 10th Street South to 4th Street be quickly implemented, so that highway widening, water system installation and sewer line construction can be achieved simultaneously with some cost savings and considerable less inconvenience for commercial property owners. Jeff Barton, Assistant Director of Utilities, explained that this is the second time this particular project has come before the Board, and apologized that the final summary sheet was not in typewritten form. Chairman Scurlock opened the Public Hearing, and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. R. J. McMillan, owner of two pieces of property on South U.S. #1 (Union 66 gas station and the Greyhound Bus Terminal) felt it makes it very difficult to quote numbers since he doesn't have a copy of the revised numbers, but understood his assess- ments would remain the same. He questioned the need for a 12" pipe for 30 OCT 11198 813°K 74 F--:[ 474