My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2/18/1992
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1992
>
2/18/1992
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:03:30 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 11:07:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/18/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
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
s <br />FEE H IM21 BOOK <br />1. that prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for <br />the facility the access road from 58th Avenue to the subject <br />site shall be constructed as approved by the Public Works <br />Department; and <br />2. that the area designated on the approved plan as preserved <br />native upland plant community shall remain undisturbed; no <br />clearing or tree removal shall be allowed within the <br />preservation area. <br />Commissioner Scurlock questioned the use of a prime piece of <br />property for this purpose. He mentioned that property in the <br />nearby subdivisions was priced at $40,000 to $50,000 per lot. He <br />felt we should have considered disposing of this valuable land and <br />bought cheaper property elsewhere for the effluent disposal site. <br />Community Development Director Keating stated staff looked at <br />the application for special exception to determine whether the use <br />would fit on the property and did not look at the value of the <br />site. <br />Chairman Eggert noted, and Commissioner Wheeler concurred, <br />that we are not changing the value of other property out there by <br />using this site for effluent disposal. <br />Commissioner Scurlock felt that was the wrong attitude. He <br />said this wastewater treatment plant originally was placed on the <br />least desirable piece. At that time the County was not in the <br />utilities business and out of necessity the subdivision had to <br />handle their own waste. Now, however, if we can use the site for <br />something better, we should. <br />Commissioner Scurlock admitted the project is too far along to <br />change it now. He felt we should have considered the impact of <br />this facility on the adjacent property as well as the value of this <br />property versus locating another site. <br />Commissioner Wheeler asked what portion of the site was used <br />in the past,,and Director Pinto estimated 12 acres with additional <br />wells for the reward system. <br />Commissioner Wheeler asked how much it might cost to move the <br />site somewhere else and to run piping to the golf course to get rid <br />of the effluent, in relation to the difference in value between <br />that piece of property versus another piece of property. <br />Director Pinto said land fills and wastewater treatment plants <br />were located on undevelopable ground. Now we must look at the <br />highest and driest when we are locating this type of system. <br />Commissioner Scurlock pointed out this is not next to the <br />wastewater treatment plant, and Director Pinto pointed out this is <br />located strategically between the two golf courses that we are <br />irrigating. <br />Commissioner Scurlock said we could locate a site closer to <br />the actual treatment plant where the effluent is created and pipe <br />it to the places where it will be used for irrigation. <br />18 <br />M <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.