3/5/1991 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MAR 5 X99 BOOK 82 PAGE S43 Director Davis advised that staff's recommendation is the same as it was on February 12th, and that was that the County not reassume maintenance of the bridge. The County Attorney's Office has researched the matter and prepared a resolution if the Board should wish to adopt a formal resolution abandoning the County's interest. John Crews, petitioner, explained that the bridge was put in there to serve several homes that were built on the west side of the bridge. There are two home sites who are owned by people who are not relatives, and he didn't feel he had the right to close the bridge or the road to them. He questioned why the County ever put that bridge in there originally if it was not for a good reason. Chairman Bird felt the County should either give Mr. Crews the bridge and allow him to have a private bridge and road, or go ahead and accept maintenance. Attorney Vitunac advised that his office is recommending that we adopt a resolution abandoning Indian River County's interest, if any, in the road and bridge west of CR -507 along Ditch 1 north of Fellsmere. If Mr. Crews has some neighbors who have a right to continue using it, that is a private matter. It doesn't make it a public road. If he wanted to have a locked gate there and give the key to certain people, he could do that with a private road. Commissioner Scurlock anticipated that one of the questions that would be raised at the public hearing on the proposed resolution would be why public dollars were spent to access private property. Mr. Crews believed the reason for that was that the bridge was put in way back when they dug the Park Lateral Canal. Chairman Bird asked Mr. Crews if he would be willing to convey the right-of-way if the County assumed maintenance, but Director Davis indicated that would not be a good solution. 42