Laserfiche WebLink
wants to subdivide he would have to pay a premium at that time to <br />bring in water lines. <br />Director Pinto strongly recommended against designing systems <br />that would leave out certain streets or certain looped lines simply <br />because there happened to be an area that is not developed. He <br />felt that if an assessment is done fairly and everyone is charged <br />equitably, they all get the same benefit or potential benefit from <br />the project. <br />Commissioner Scurlock asked whether the master plan included <br />looped areas within the overall area that are small enough to allow <br />some flexibility. <br />Director Pinto advised that there is a larger assessment <br />project and Glendale Lakes Subdivision is a part of that larger <br />project. The property owners of Glendale Lakes Subdivision <br />petitioned for water as soon as possible and that is why this <br />portion of the system is being addressed now. Director Pinto <br />indicated the location of Mr. Gallagher's property on the enlarged <br />map and stated that the water line in front of this property must <br />be built. He suggested that if the Board did not want to charge <br />Mr. Gallagher, the Board should either pay for it or assess it to <br />the rest of the people, but that line could not be excluded from <br />the system. <br />Discussion ensued regarding the various methods used in <br />calculating the assessments. <br />Commissioner Scurlock pointed out that the Commission, sitting <br />as the Equalizing. Board, could give relief only if Mr. Gallagher's <br />situation were unique, which perhaps could be the unusual shape of <br />his property. On the other hand, it could be subdivided since it <br />is grandfathered in. <br />County Attorney Charles Vitunac confirmed that he and Mr. <br />Gallagher had a discussion with Current Development Staff Planner <br />John McCoy and Bo=nd out that Mr: Gallagher could put3 units on <br />the front 2 acres of the property, excluding the back 2 acres. <br />Mr. Gallagher thought the assessment as calculated is <br />confiscatory and if he must be included in the assessment, he would <br />like it adjusted downward. <br />William A. Barman, representing his elderly mother, Elizabeth <br />A. Earman of 4550 8th Street, came before the Board and recounted <br />the history of the property ownership. He estimated that the <br />property is 58% in grove, 15% in home and lawn, and has lakes and <br />undevelopable area. He said that they would be willing to put in <br />writing that they would never subdivide and that if they ever sold <br />the property that writing would be attached to the sale of the <br />property. He stated that they have no desire for county water <br />37 <br />AUG 18 N92 BOOK �'` <br />