My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1/2/1990
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1990
>
1/2/1990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:02:43 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 8:34:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
01/02/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
79
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
_I <br />,JAN E 19k, BOOK l ® i <br />footage assessment. Utilities would have no problem in doing <br />that, but it has to be very well established that the property <br />would never be developed. <br />Chairman Eggert opened the Public Hearing, and asked if <br />anyone wished to be heard in this matter. <br />Ed Schlitt, local realtor, commended the County Commission <br />and the Utilities Dept. for trying to stay ahead of the utility <br />needs in the county. He felt we are in much better shape than a <br />lot of other counties around the state as it relates to the <br />concurrency issue of growth management. However, he felt that as <br />we move forward in these things, we do need to look very <br />carefully at the fairness of the assessments involved. He <br />concurred that it would be very beneficial if the County could <br />get a reserve fund started, because it would relieve the burden <br />on a few property owners in making utilities available for <br />whoever comes later. If a formula could be worked out where <br />those funds cau-l-d--b-e--- advan-ced and then assessed to the property <br />owner at the time the property is developed, he believed that <br />would be the fairest approach. Of the 43 acres he owns on Indian <br />River Boulevard, their surveyor has determined that 26 or 27 <br />acres would not be developable, but the assessment for this <br />property is almost $49,000. They do have one unit per acre <br />density transfer, but with the type of development that would go <br />into that area and the type of development that is considered <br />most compatible to the community, he didn't know whether that <br />transfer of density would make any difference. He personally <br />would like to see cluster -type housing, leaving as much <br />vegetation as possible. Mr. Schlitt felt it is entirely <br />possible that they might be willing to agree that there will <br />never be any development on that property and transfer the <br />ownership of that property to the County, or who ever,. -since all <br />it does is stay on the tax rolls. If you can't develop it, you <br />can't develop it. They have been working with a group that was <br />18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.