My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1/7/1992
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1992
>
1/7/1992
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:03:30 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 10:52:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
01/07/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
73
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
J ' `.,f. ,g a 21 <br />.� <br />BOOK PA1J i <br />existing alignment of CR -512, which would be their south property <br />line, but none of the property owners expressed a desire to <br />cooperate on that level. All of this property falls within the <br />city limits of Sebastian. We have not made any offers to purchase <br />any of their property because we felt the community supported the <br />Twin Pairs project, particularly after the 1989 resolution the City <br />adopted. <br />Commissioner Bird believed that the Twin Pairs project would <br />open up a new corridor of potential commercial zoning and <br />development that could be quite an enhancement to the tax base up <br />there. He felt that people are inherently opposed to one-way <br />streets, but didn't think there has been that much opposition from <br />the merchants along the SR -60 Twin Pairs project. <br />Commissioner Scurlock commented that there was a lot of <br />support for the Vero Beach project. <br />Mr. Wadsworth wished to widen his closing remarks by informing <br />the Board that both Park Place Homeowners Association and the <br />Roseland Property Owners Association are in favor of widening the <br />existing roadway and do not want the Twin Pairs project. He asked <br />all of those in attendance today who are in opposition to the Twin <br />Pairs project to stand, and about 25 people stood. Mr. Wadsworth <br />asked the Board to take some action on this matter this morning. <br />Commissioner Scurlock asked Director Davis what it would do to <br />the overall timing of the project if the Board were to reverse <br />their decision this morning, and Director Davis.felt it would be <br />very difficult to put a specific number of months on the time <br />extension. First, we would have to get with the consulting <br />engineer, renegotiate a contract and bring it to the Board for <br />approval; issue orders to proceed for further survey and design <br />work; and construct a new right-of-way map to determine what <br />additional right-of-way would be required. After the design was <br />completed, we would seek appraisals for right-of-way acquisition <br />which takes_ 60-90 days. After the appraisals are secured, we <br />review them and send out offers to property owners. The main <br />factor affecting the time frame is how the property owners along <br />the roadway respond to the County's offers. If they are willing to <br />sell their property and agree with the County's appraisals, it <br />could take an additional 6 months at the soonest to complete the <br />title and mortgage paper work. Once all the title work and the <br />deed preparation is completed and we agree on price and have <br />closings on the property, we would then go into utility relocations <br />and stormwater permitting. After the stormwater permits have been <br />acquired, we could put the job out to bid. Director Davis really <br />didn't think it could be done sooner than 2 years. <br />30 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.